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.

FES thats just your opinion. It is perfectly acceptable to have conflicting opinions because like you said it was a close call and there have been plenty of rational arguements for selecting O'Driscoll, many perpetuated outside of Ireland so its not a case of being a minotaur with green glasses as you say.

The thing is this saga really isnt getting much air time or column inches in Ireland anymore. Not as much as in the UK anyway where the media seem to be all over it. The whole debate is troll fodder IMO anyway and not exactly news.

GunsGerms wrote:FES thats just your opinion. It is perfectly acceptable to have conflicting opinions because like you said it was a close call and there have been plenty of rational arguements for selecting O'Driscoll, many perpetuated outside of Ireland so its not a case of being a minotaur with green glasses as you say.

The thing is this saga really isnt getting much air time or column inches in Ireland anymore. Not as much as in the UK anyway where the media seem to be all over it. The whole debate is troll fodder IMO anyway and not exactly news.

  on both points, Guns

GunsGerms wrote:FES thats just your opinion. It is perfectly acceptable to have conflicting opinions because like you said it was a close call and there have been plenty of rational arguements for selecting O'Driscoll, many perpetuated outside of Ireland so its not a case of being a minotaur with green glasses as you say.

The thing is this saga really isnt getting much air time or column inches in Ireland anymore. Not as much as in the UK anyway where the media seem to be all over it. The whole debate is troll fodder IMO anyway and not exactly news.

Just to be clear, my "one-eyed" comment was addressed to posters who simply cannot accept the decision to select JD2 could be justified on rugby grounds, but rather some vendetta or non-rugby reason of Gatland, and that BOD was the only possible outcome were you to base the decision on rugby grounds alone.

Whichever side of the line you come out, and I happen to believe JD2 correctly edged the decision on rugby grounds, I think it's right to recognise that it was a close call, and I've not seen or heard any factual basis upon which to conclude that Gatland made the decision for anything other than rugby reasons.

You are also correct that there are plenty non-Irish posters who would have picked BOD, as there are plenty non-Welsh posters (like myself) who would have picked JD2. I have however yet to see a non-Irish poster take the "Sin e" position, which is that BOD was the only rugby choice, and that by dint of that fact, Gatland must have dropped him for his own personal non-rugby reasons. I'm sorry, but I see that as one-eyed.

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:FES thats just your opinion. It is perfectly acceptable to have conflicting opinions because like you said it was a close call and there have been plenty of rational arguements for selecting O'Driscoll, many perpetuated outside of Ireland so its not a case of being a minotaur with green glasses as you say.

The thing is this saga really isnt getting much air time or column inches in Ireland anymore. Not as much as in the UK anyway where the media seem to be all over it. The whole debate is troll fodder IMO anyway and not exactly news.

  on both points, Guns

+1, to be fair the British Press do like to find stories and keep them going all the time that people talk about them. And we talk about cack all the time it is in the press, so it is likely this will continue for a while, die down as the AIs (maybe raise its head if/when Wales lose to Aus) then it will be back again for the 6Ns as reason for a grudge match between Ireland and Wales.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:FES thats just your opinion. It is perfectly acceptable to have conflicting opinions because like you said it was a close call and there have been plenty of rational arguements for selecting O'Driscoll, many perpetuated outside of Ireland so its not a case of being a minotaur with green glasses as you say.

The thing is this saga really isnt getting much air time or column inches in Ireland anymore. Not as much as in the UK anyway where the media seem to be all over it. The whole debate is troll fodder IMO anyway and not exactly news.

  on both points, Guns

+1, to be fair the British Press do like to find stories and keep them going all the time that people talk about them.  And we talk about cack all the time it is in the press, so it is likely this will continue for a while, die down as the AIs (maybe raise its head if/when Wales lose to Aus) then it will be back again for the 6Ns as reason for a grudge match between Ireland and Wales.

Oh God, you just made me think about what the Wales vs Ireland fixture will be like next season.....this place will be unbearable!!

funnyExiledScot wrote:Oh God, you just made me think about what the Wales vs Ireland fixture will be like next season.....this place will be unbearable!!

Even worse if BOD gets injured and hits out at the IRFU physio's who have halted a chance of 'redemption' over Gatland.

fEs - just think how bad it has been since Gats has been with Wales, we have had the "Gatland Vrs O'Sullivan - Master Against Backstabber", and then a year or so later we have "Wales Vrs Ireland - Wales Against Their Most Hated Rivals", and now we can scale it up with "BOD Vrs Foxy - Legend Against Upstart" or whatever. And in truth nobody will really give a flying fudge about anything bar the actual match.

The Welsh are the innocent party here - just caught in the crossfire of a long-running Ireland/Gatland feud.

gcBlues wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:Oh God, you just made me think about what the Wales vs Ireland fixture will be like next season.....this place will be unbearable!!

Even worse if BOD gets injured and hits out at the IRFU physio's who have halted a chance of 'redemption' over Gatland.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

funnyExiledScot wrote:I've not seen or heard any factual basis upon which to conclude that Gatland made the decision for anything other than rugby reasons.

Nope, nor have I.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:I've not seen or heard any factual basis upon which to conclude that Gatland made the decision for anything other than rugby reasons.

Nope, nor have I.

Tis true, that - I don't see how anyone remotely wishing to be taken seriously can claim that 'rugby' reasons were not behind the selection - now, you may not agree with them, and still be right despite the result, but that's altogether another matter

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

ME-109 wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

ME-109 wrote:Defense 101 watch your own man and trust your inside man to watch his...

Far too much watching going on.

Spot on..and it wasn't by the guy who made missed his tackle 5 metres from the line

Corrected that for you...... THE BALL HAD GONE!  

Do you think Davies was at fault for this try?



He didn't make the tackle before BoD passed the ball and so in your view it must be his fault.

I'm more inclined to blame Cuthbert who left his man unmarked but if you feel Davies was at fault here we have a fundamental disagreement with how defense works in rugby.

That is not quite the same situation, there was no overlap there, and the welsh were all (bar Cuthbert) marking their man, meaning the ball could be shipped to the wing and Cuthbert should have chopped his man down.

There was no overlap in the Lions Test either,Lydiate,BoD,Davies,Bowe versus JoC,AAC and the Aussie winger.4 defenders versus 3 attackers.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

 Soreleftshoulder

As I think you are completely missing the point, I thought I would watch the video and pass on my comments, however you tube come up with;

"the uploader has not made this video available for viewing in your Country".

What do you think I'm missing?

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:That is not quite the same situation, there was no overlap there, and the welsh were all (bar Cuthbert) marking their man, meaning the ball could be shipped to the wing and Cuthbert should have chopped his man down.

There was no overlap in the Lions Test either,Lydiate,BoD,Davies,Bowe versus JoC,AAC and the Aussie winger.4 defenders versus 3 attackers

Good point.  But what I meant was that there were no gaps in that welsh defence it was a simple case of Cuthbert coming off his wing when it wasn't needed, except for Cuthber coming inside, where as IMO on the Lions match there was a gap between BOD and Foxy, and too little a gap between BOD and Lydiate (both basically pillars at the ruck).  But that has been done to death on about three or four different threads now.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:That is not quite the same situation, there was no overlap there, and the welsh were all (bar Cuthbert) marking their man, meaning the ball could be shipped to the wing and Cuthbert should have chopped his man down.

There was no overlap in the Lions Test either,Lydiate,BoD,Davies,Bowe versus JoC,AAC and the Aussie winger.4 defenders versus 3 attackers

Good point.  But what I meant was that there were no gaps in that welsh defence it was a simple case of Cuthbert coming off his wing when it wasn't needed, except for Cuthber coming inside, where as IMO on the Lions match there was a gap between BOD and Foxy, and too little a gap between BOD and Lydiate (both basically pillars at the ruck).  But that has been done to death on about three or four different threads now.

Fair enough I can understnd that view point I just disagree.

At the end of the day Davies missed a critical tackle he shouldnt have missed. Not sure how he can blame anyone else but himself for that one. I dont think it was enough to drop him on that alone at all but I'm sure he will be dissapointed with himself. As I said before for me it wasnt as bad an error as Philips blatant laziness for the first Folau try or Sexton's terrible effort on Folau for the second. Davies mistake was possibly more critical though but at least he tried.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/britishandirishlionsrugby/10297284/Brian-ODriscoll-should-have-not-have-hit-out-at-Warren-Gatland-it-sounds-like-sour-grapes.html

That was already posted.

The telegraph have themselves run stories questioning Gatlands selections:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/britishandirishlionsrugby/10161018/Lions-2013-have-the-Lions-been-devalued-by-Warren-Gatlands-selection-for-final-Test.html

To me again its just a case of much ado about nothing.

"Mistake"...........

Yes I agree it was a missed tackle and it was critical as up to the time Warburton went off, The Lions were in control of the match. I mean how dare he stop a rampaging full tilt AAC with 4-5 metres  from the line, especially as Davies had just seen his acting captain easily smother JoC therefore stopping any chance of AAC having the perfect pass as he was full throttle in motion  . The reason Davies didn't make a better effort is he was out of position having to readjust his defensive line, I doubt (from that experience and the sub sequential fallout) if he ever will cover someone's derrière again.

I think Davies over the years is going to think
"why the hell did I attempt to cover his arse when I got so much vitriolic abuse when selected, I should have just effing bawled him out, covered the outside centre line even though through every practice session our outside centre knows he should be here next to Bowe, and let the demi god be hung out to dry"

That way the stats would have shown Davies didn't have to make the tackle because JoC would have sauntered in for his try.

For me it wasn't as poor as the prior 60 seconds when we attempted to find touch twice and didn't, let three poor tackles meant the Aussies gained so much momentum. Farrell should have come on probably by the 55th minute. So really poor selections by Gatland all round and worsened as the tour went on, Hogg being mucked about, Grant not coming on, Farrell not being brought on when he was clearly the better 10 by the 2nd test, Bowe being selected when he was injured, Cuthbert being dropped when he probably had the best strike rate, Shane Williams  , the debacle that was the Brumbies game, but at least he got the final test selection pretty much spot on.

And finally..... I agree with you, at least Davies tried.

GunsGerms wrote:At the end of the day Davies missed a critical tackle..........

....because he was left trying to cover O'Connor and AAC at the same time.  As explained in detail, at length, by various folk, above and in the other threads.

Davies was damned if he stepped in and damned if he stayed out.  If he stays out then O'Connor accelerates through the gap and scores, if he steps in to cover the gap then he leaves an almost certain try for AAC on the charge.  Even BOD in his prime couldn't have saved the situation from where Davies found himself.

The try was certain from the moment JOC was given acres of space to take at least seven strides, unchallenged, and weigh up all his options.  AAC ran a fantastic line to assist his decision making!  Whether this defensive lapse was down to the absent Lions backrow, BOD being so slow, or Australia's phase play, I no longer care.

Casartelli wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:At the end of the day Davies missed a critical tackle..........

....because he was left trying to cover O'Connor and AAC at the same time.  As explained in detail, at length, by various folk, above and in the other threads.

Davies was damned if he stepped in and damned if he stayed out.  If he stays out then O'Connor accelerates through the gap and scores, if he steps in to cover the gap then he leaves an almost certain try for AAC on the charge.  Even BOD in his prime couldn't have saved the situation from where Davies found himself.

The try was certain from the moment JOC was given acres of space to take at least seven strides, unchallenged, and weigh up all his options.  AAC ran a fantastic line to assist his decision making!  Whether this defensive lapse was down to the absent Lions backrow, BOD being so slow, or Australia's phase play, I no longer care.

Cas old bean......

We are not going to win this one........ wait for a few days and he will bang on about I am the only one who thinks that Davies attempted to cover BODs poor positional play and miss-management of the game.

Guys can we just move on from this whole stuff about 'the tackle' as we have tried to get points across, on both sides, but are not going to get anywhere as we all have our beliefs about what happened, and where, if any, fault lies. I honesty doubt any of us will change our opinions even if the players themselves came out and said who was to blame.

That's good for me Spidey

flyhalffactory wrote:"Mistake"...........

Yes I agree it was a missed tackle and it was critical as up to the time Warburton went off, The Lions were in control of the match. I mean how dare he stop a rampaging full tilt AAC with 4-5 metres  from the line, especially as Davies had just seen his acting captain easily smother JoC therefore stopping any chance of AAC having the perfect pass as he was full throttle in motion  . The reason Davies didn't make a better effort is he was out of position having to readjust his defensive line, I doubt (from that experience and the sub sequential fallout) if he ever will cover someone's derrière again.

I think Davies over the years is going to think
"why the hell did I attempt to cover his arse when I got so much vitriolic abuse when selected, I should have just effing bawled him out, covered the outside centre line even though through every practice session our outside centre knows he should be here next to Bowe, and let the demi god be hung out to dry"

That way the stats would have shown Davies didn't have to make the tackle because JoC would have sauntered in for his try.

For me it wasn't as poor as the prior 60 seconds when we attempted to find touch twice and didn't, let three poor tackles meant the Aussies gained so much momentum. Farrell should have come on probably by the 55th minute. So really poor selections by Gatland all round and worsened as the tour went on, Hogg being mucked about, Grant not coming on, Farrell not being brought on when he was clearly the better 10 by the 2nd test, Bowe being selected when he was injured, Cuthbert being dropped when he probably had the best strike rate, Shane Williams  , the debacle that was the Brumbies game, but at least he got the final test selection pretty much spot on.

And finally..... I agree with you, at least Davies tried.

You are basing your theories on an assumption that O'Driscoll would have missed a tackle on JOC had he gone for the line. The only thing we actually know for a fact is Davies missed a tackle he shouldnt have missed. You can dress your arguements up with as much conjecture and blame as you want but it is a fairly clear cut Davies mistake.

Im looking forward to the film of bods life story . i think gatland and jd2 will be played by actors who are notorious for playing villains

jimmyinthewell68 wrote:Im looking forward to the film of bods life story . i think gatland and jd2  will be played by actors who are notorious for playing villains  

Dont know how well that will go down with them being played by English actors then...

The tackle debate was boring anyway - it's the language used by BOD in post-tour interviews and the reluctance of his followers to accept that he was past his best, that are interesting.

Maybe BOD being dropped is rugby's 'Diana Moment'.

lostinwales wrote:

jimmyinthewell68 wrote:Im looking forward to the film of bods life story . i think gatland and jd2  will be played by actors who are notorious for playing villains  

Dont know how well that will go down with them being played by English actors then...

Shame John Candy is dead he did the buffoon pretty well, and had the right overall size for Gats.

I was thinking Gats could be played by the bloke who plays Minty in Eastenders.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I was thinking Gats could be played by the bloke who plays Minty in Eastenders.

looks are right but he too nice a person . how about ray winstone . whos the daddy Brian

funnyExiledScot wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:FES thats just your opinion. It is perfectly acceptable to have conflicting opinions because like you said it was a close call and there have been plenty of rational arguements for selecting O'Driscoll, many perpetuated outside of Ireland so its not a case of being a minotaur with green glasses as you say.

The thing is this saga really isnt getting much air time or column inches in Ireland anymore. Not as much as in the UK anyway where the media seem to be all over it. The whole debate is troll fodder IMO anyway and not exactly news.

Just to be clear, my "one-eyed" comment was addressed to posters who simply cannot accept the decision to select JD2 could be justified on rugby grounds, but rather some vendetta or non-rugby reason of Gatland, and that BOD was the only possible outcome were you to base the decision on rugby grounds alone.

Whichever side of the line you come out, and I happen to believe JD2 correctly edged the decision on rugby grounds, I think it's right to recognise that it was a close call, and I've not seen or heard any factual basis upon which to conclude that Gatland made the decision for anything other than rugby reasons.

You are also correct that there are plenty non-Irish posters who would have picked BOD, as there are plenty non-Welsh posters (like myself) who would have picked JD2. I have however yet to see a non-Irish poster take the "Sin e" position, which is that BOD was the only rugby choice, and that by dint of that fact, Gatland must have dropped him for his own personal non-rugby reasons. I'm sorry, but I see that as one-eyed.

I think we can all agree the Lions completly threw away the second test when the Aussies were on the rack and there for the taking. The Lions were way too negative and conservative and paid the price. I heard and I'm not sure if this is just rumour or not but aparently after the second test Heaslip, O'Driscoll and Sexton met with Gatland to discuss the tactics. Gatland took exception to this and as a result O'Driscoll and Heaslip were axed but Sexton because he was absolutly key was retained only to be subbed off when the lead was unassailable. He was noticably annoyed when subbed as he had just scored a cracker.

You may believe that the Davies selection was a rugby decision but its plausable enough that O'Driscoll is angry about it because he himself believes that there is more to it than simply just a rugby decision. Whether it was or not only Gatland knows but we do know he has a lot of negative history with Irish players so he hasnt done himself any favour in that respect.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I was thinking Gats could be played by the bloke who plays Minty in Eastenders.

I think we should change this topic to what Lions should play who in Eastenders

I think Martyn Williams (ok ex-lion) should play that guy who always cheats on his wife and has a better looking bro

GunsGerms wrote:I think we can all agree the Lions completly threw away the second test when the Aussies were on the rack and there for the taking.

Wasn't that when Warburton went off and O'Driscoll took over as captain?

I think making Gats come across as a hard man would be good for his image, it would be better to make him look like a simpleton who just bumbles along.

Oh real shame they are long gone, but anyone think that the ideal Gats and Howley would be Laurel and Hardy?

flyhalffactory wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I was thinking Gats could be played by the bloke who plays Minty in Eastenders.

I think we should change this topic to what Lions should play who in Eastenders

I think Martyn Williams (ok ex-lion) should play that guy who always cheats on his wife and has a better looking bro

you mean max . good shout . howley could be played by billy

Can we extend this to Coronation Street? Stick a wig on Declan Kidney and he'd pass for Gail Platt.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:I think we can all agree the Lions completly threw away the second test when the Aussies were on the rack and there for the taking.

Wasn't that when Warburton went off and O'Driscoll took over as captain?

No the turning point was when Davies missed a tackle on AAC for a match winning try. Captain isnt relevant when the tactics are to blame. We were over relaint on Halfpenny's kicking and didnt show anywhere near enough creativity or endevour in the backs. The Aussies were there for the taking.

Do you think BOD is miffed that Gatland hasn't called to apologise to him yet?

GloriousEmpire wrote:Do you think BOD is miffed that Gatland hasn't called to apologise to him yet?

No but I think it takes a coward and a fairly weakminded individual to break someones collarbone and not offer an apology afterwards particularly as it could be career threatening or almost a year on the sidelines as it turned out. Not only did he not offer an apology he called Brian a "sook" whatever that is. Its fairly standard to feel bad about it when you break a bone in someone elses body. Possibly not where you're from GE.

Breaking bones? Surely Gatland only used words? I didn't notice any sticks and stones?

Casartelli wrote:The Welsh are the innocent party here - just caught in the crossfire of a long-running Ireland/Gatland feud.

Actually I think you're the Emporer Palpatine in this whole row. Lurking in the background manipulating everything while ringing your hands saying ' good, good'....

jimmyinthewell68 wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I was thinking Gats could be played by the bloke who plays Minty in Eastenders.

I think we should change this topic to what Lions should play who in Eastenders

I think Martyn Williams (ok ex-lion) should play that guy who always cheats on his wife and has a better looking bro

         you mean max   . good shout .  howley could be played by billy

I think Howley and Dot Cotton are separated by birth

Theyre even talking about O'Driscoll in Dubai;

"Brian O'Driscoll damaging legacy by complaining about Lions axing"
http://www.7daysindubai.com/SPORT-OPINION-Brian-O-Driscoll-damaging-legacy/story-19774145-detail/story.html

GunsGerms wrote:
You may believe that the Davies selection was a rugby decision but its plausable enough that O'Driscoll is angry about it because he himself believes that there is more to it than simply just a rugby decision. Whether it was or not only Gatland knows but we do know he has a lot of negative history with Irish players so he hasnt done himself any favour in that respect.

Can't wait for BOD's autobiography. Its going to be a best seller! This little controversey should shift a few books. Will be out this time next year - which is great. Paul Kimmage has a fair bit of it done already I believe.

By the way - its the 'tackle' I don't give two tosses about.

As long as it's better than his last book. That was a load of guff.

Risca Rev wrote:As long as it's better than his last book. That was a load of guff.

Paul Kimmage is a good writer. Should be excellent.

Sin é wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:
You may believe that the Davies selection was a rugby decision but its plausable enough that O'Driscoll is angry about it because he himself believes that there is more to it than simply just a rugby decision. Whether it was or not only Gatland knows but we do know he has a lot of negative history with Irish players so he hasnt done himself any favour in that respect.

Can't wait for BOD's autobiography. Its going to be a best seller! This little controversey should shift a few books. Will be out this time next year - which is great. Paul Kimmage has a fair bit of it done already I believe.

By the way - its the 'tackle' I don't give two tosses about.

Will it be bigger than The Bible?

Sin é wrote:

Risca Rev wrote:As long as it's better than his last book. That was a load of guff.

Paul Kimmage is a good writer. Should be excellent.

 

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Sin é wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:
You may believe that the Davies selection was a rugby decision but its plausable enough that O'Driscoll is angry about it because he himself believes that there is more to it than simply just a rugby decision. Whether it was or not only Gatland knows but we do know he has a lot of negative history with Irish players so he hasnt done himself any favour in that respect.

Can't wait for BOD's autobiography. Its going to be a best seller! This little controversey should shift a few books. Will be out this time next year - which is great. Paul Kimmage has a fair bit of it done already I believe.

By the way - its the 'tackle' I don't give two tosses about.

Will it be bigger than The Bible?

It will be quality, not quantity.

Seriously though, Kimmage is excellent. Not afraid to tackle anyone or anything. BOD selecting him says nothing will be held back.

Sin é wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Sin é wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:
You may believe that the Davies selection was a rugby decision but its plausable enough that O'Driscoll is angry about it because he himself believes that there is more to it than simply just a rugby decision. Whether it was or not only Gatland knows but we do know he has a lot of negative history with Irish players so he hasnt done himself any favour in that respect.

Can't wait for BOD's autobiography. Its going to be a best seller! This little controversey should shift a few books. Will be out this time next year - which is great. Paul Kimmage has a fair bit of it done already I believe.

By the way - its the 'tackle' I don't give two tosses about.

Will it be bigger than The Bible?

It will be quality, not quantity.

Seriously though, Kimmage is excellent. Not afraid to tackle anyone or anything. BOD selecting him says nothing will be held back.

Will it be better than the Bible?