Irish fans?

by mckay1402 Thu 12 Mar 2015, 10:38 am

First topic message reminder :

I just wondered whether Neil Francis represents the views of most Irish fans. Given that the Lions series was almost 2 years ago and the final match result kind of vindicated his decision do Ireland fans still feel bitter about it?

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/wales-v-ireland-six-nations-8824442

by Chunky Norwich Thu 12 Mar 2015, 2:20 pm

marty2086 wrote:
mckay1402 wrote:I just wondered whether Neil Francis represents the views of most Irish fans. Given that the Lions series was almost 2 years ago and the final match result kind of vindicated his decision do Ireland fans still feel bitter about it?

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/wales-v-ireland-six-nations-8824442

No bitterness at all, we know Joe will lead the Lions to a clean sweep in NZ in 2017 with a team filled with Irish players and no Sam Warburton in sight and balance shall be restored

Joe Schmidt is twice the coach Gatland is. If he selects 12 Irishmen and they beat New Zealand, you won't here me moaning.

by Chunky Norwich Thu 12 Mar 2015, 2:21 pm

Irish Londoner wrote:
As to the "he picked Welsh players to give them experience of beating Australia" theory, we'll see how that holds up in the Autumn.

We saw last Autumn.

by wolfball Thu 12 Mar 2015, 2:42 pm

The game on Saturday is maybe 4-5 times more important then any Lions tour, as its our side (fully our side) against your side (fully your side). The Lions are a nice distraction, but anyone losing sleep over it still really needs to figure out their rugby priorities. For me its, Nation, Local Club (go on Ballinrobe) Province, Lions.

by SecretFly Thu 12 Mar 2015, 2:42 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
SecretFly wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:

Nonsense. The notion that he selected his mates for future Wales experience instead of solely wanting a Lions series win is ludicrous.

No it isn't ludicrous. It's very much something you don't want to hear, but it's not ludicrous.

Ludicrous.

c).

c) it is.

by **Notch** Thu 12 Mar 2015, 2:47 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
mckay1402 wrote:I just wondered whether Neil Francis represents the views of most Irish fans. Given that the Lions series was almost 2 years ago and the final match result kind of vindicated his decision do Ireland fans still feel bitter about it?

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/wales-v-ireland-six-nations-8824442

No bitterness at all, we know Joe will lead the Lions to a clean sweep in NZ in 2017 with a team filled with Irish players and no Sam Warburton in sight and balance shall be restored

Joe Schmidt is twice the coach Gatland is. If he selects 12 Irishmen and they beat New Zealand, you won't here me moaning.

You would hear me moaning. Thats not the point and it never has been. 12 of any nation is too much, whether it's your own team and your biggest rivals team.

I basically think the Lions is about combining four nations into one team and it doesn't work if its biased towards one team even if that is what gives the best chance of winning- I think this is the reason why the Lions is out of date and an anachronism. Because the things that make it most worthwhile are not compatible with what it takes to win in test rugby.

Wouldn't blame Gatland or any future coach including Schmidt for doing whatever it takes to win, thats what they are employed to do after all, but it's not the ethos I love about the Lions. The ethos of the Lions is rooted in the amateur era and just doesn't work anymore. Unless they go out to make it a balance of four nations with a positive and attacking game plan, I'm not interested and I don't really care about the results. For me the only reason for it's continued existence is because it's a cash cow.

by Guest Thu 12 Mar 2015, 2:55 pm

SecretFly wrote:
Munchkin wrote: If anything he is having a go at Ireland!

Yeah, I think both sides could legitimately use it as 'one for the wall' to get the grunt up before the game.

There has been a distinct lack of hype coming out of the wales camp. Other than acknowledgments from either side on how their opponents will be difficult to beat. Not excuses should they lose, but an attempt at shifting the pressure perhaps, with the likes of Shaun Edwards claiming that Ireland is the best NH side. He isn't wrong. Gatland is playing a different sort of mindgame. He doesn't want to fire the Irish up. And so in the absence of controversial quips, it's left to the likes of Francis to whip up the prematch hype. I'm not sure if the players will pay much attention to what Francis has to say. The thoughts of winning a grand slam will be more than enough motivation for Ireland, methinks. They owe it to us after all 4 Provinces lost their games at the weekend mad

by thebandwagonsociety Thu 12 Mar 2015, 2:56 pm

I agree with you notch. I like the lions because you get great combinations and see players who have teared strips from each other for years go on tour together, put on the jersey and strike up a partnership.

Greenwood and BOD. POC/Gray/Aln Wyn Jones, BOD and Davies, Phillips and Sexton, Healy/Cole/Jones. Bowe and North. The french teams are trying to buy these kind of ultra-rare combinations but it is still special when it happens in the Lions jersey

by Sin é Thu 12 Mar 2015, 3:09 pm

I don't think it makes a difference whether the Lions win or not. Most the followers on the tour are just there for a good time - all it is is a touring side which is around for 2 months every 4 years.

I enjoy it because it means a lot to the players as it is a sort of measure of what their standing is in the international stage (it was anyway up to when Gatland decided it was Team Wales & a few hole fillers) and they make a good few bob on it. It also helps fill the coffers of the strapped for cash SH countries.

by jimmyinthewell68 Thu 12 Mar 2015, 3:11 pm

Notch wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
jimmyinthewell68 wrote:The Welsh muppets I know rather argue about English football teams Liverpool and man United on facebook rather then the rugby

This has got to be a joke. Take a look at Irish media. Irish times, Irish sports news. They are ALL over the Premiership and it's top teams like a rash. The Man Utds, the Liverpools, the Arsenals etc.

Is the Welsh media fawning over those sides? Errrr no they're not - and we have a side in the Premiership!! It's not even as if Ireland is in the UK!!!

yes I'm Welsh

So if you want to throw those football stones, make sure you've got a net to catch some coming your own way.

...I think he's Welsh though?

by offload Thu 12 Mar 2015, 3:12 pm

I agree with the points above regarding the ethos of the Lions and as a Welsh fan I didn't like seeing 10 Welshman in the team. In fact, rather than seeing this as the Lions needing 10 Welshman to win I was reminded that we needed 5 others to beat a SH team!

Anyway, regardless of the Lions ethos, I also think the notion that Gatland had any motive other than winning a test series most definitely ludicrous. His methods and approach can be questioned, but thinking he had one eye on his future with the Welsh team is delusional. That would require far more nous than the average tub of flora!

by jimmyinthewell68 Thu 12 Mar 2015, 3:14 pm

Notch wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
jimmyinthewell68 wrote:The Welsh muppets I know rather argue about English football teams Liverpool and man United on facebook rather then the rugby

This has got to be a joke. Take a look at Irish media. Irish times, Irish sports news. They are ALL over the Premiership and it's top teams like a rash. The Man Utds, the Liverpools, the Arsenals etc.

Is the Welsh media fawning over those sides? Errrr no they're not - and we have a side in the Premiership!! It's not even as if Ireland is in the UK!!!

So if you want to throw those football stones, make sure you've got a net to catch some coming your own way.

...I think he's Welsh though?

yes I'm Welsh . Hug

by Chunky Norwich Thu 12 Mar 2015, 3:26 pm

offload wrote:

Anyway, regardless of the Lions ethos, I also think the notion that Gatland had any motive other than winning a test series most definitely ludicrous. His methods and approach can be questioned, but thinking he had one eye on his future with the Welsh team is delusional. That would require far more nous than the average tub of flora!

Absolutely.

by SecretFly Thu 12 Mar 2015, 3:30 pm

BTW............ for all those who continue to feel the ripples of that 'eventful' Lions tour....and remember it with distaste and bitterness.

That LION'S SERIES of 2013 will never be forgotten. I don't think any other tour has ever gotten so much publicity that circled around the planet at light speed and created tsunamis of interest in areas of the world that would never have watched a game of rugby before.

It was a true cultural moment in the sporting world - and for once, it fully belonged to rugby. Wink

So, I thought as entertainment value, it was an absolute ball. I thoroughly enjoyed the ride. It was like being involved in a War of the Worlds - and everyone who had a role to play should feel honoured because it certainly will be one of those periods when you can sit the grandkids on your knee and say "I lived through that! It was Glorious - and the rugby was okay now and then too" Wink

by Exiledinborders Thu 12 Mar 2015, 4:02 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
SecretFly wrote:...if b) is "about right" that seems to suggest the English and Irish contingents hadn't it in them to beat the Aussies.

Truth was different.

How is the truth was different?

Irish fans can speak about Ireland but England have beaten Australia in four out of their last five meetings so to suggest what after all were the best of the English team haven't got it in them to beat Australia was clearly nonsense.

I agree with most of Gatland's selections by the way.

by Standulstermen Thu 12 Mar 2015, 4:17 pm

Such was the dominance of the pack, warren Gatland could have selected me to play 13 in the final lions test and they still would have won. Given it is really his rep that's tarnished by a loss (as I said at the time) he is perfectly within his rights to select who he prefers. That's the job

by bedfordwelsh Thu 12 Mar 2015, 4:23 pm

[quote="Sin é"]I don't think it makes a difference whether the Lions win or not. Most the followers on the tour are just there for a good time - all it is is a touring side which is around for 2 months every 4 years.

Sin e,

Not strictly true, having a good time is a big part but winning at same time was even better especially seeing how quiet the Aussies were in and around Sydney that evening.

by Sin é Thu 12 Mar 2015, 4:46 pm

bedfordwelsh wrote:
Sin é wrote:I don't think it makes a difference whether the Lions win or not. Most the followers on the tour are just there for a good time - all it is is a touring side which is around for 2 months every 4 years.

Sin e,

Not strictly true, having a good time is a big part but winning at same time was even better especially seeing how quiet the Aussies were in and around Sydney that evening.

Only a fraction of the Lions followers go to the Tests. Most are happy with the touring and that is usually a winning spree.

Gatland has tried to cod us into thinking that winning is everything - I don't think it is with regard to the Lions - otherwise there would have been more Lions wins in its history. It would seem to me that Gatland has completely missed the whole thing as to what the Lions are about.

by No 7&1/2 Thu 12 Mar 2015, 4:49 pm

One of the reasons id like the next head coach to not be a current manager.

by **rodders** Thu 12 Mar 2015, 4:55 pm

No way would Joe do a Gats ...he'd be selecting Jordi Murphy, Isaac Boss, Devin Toner and Noel Reid for the test xv on merit.

by bedfordwelsh Thu 12 Mar 2015, 4:59 pm

Sin é wrote:
bedfordwelsh wrote:
Sin é wrote:I don't think it makes a difference whether the Lions win or not. Most the followers on the tour are just there for a good time - all it is is a touring side which is around for 2 months every 4 years.

Sin e,

Not strictly true, having a good time is a big part but winning at same time was even better especially seeing how quiet the Aussies were in and around Sydney that evening.

Only a fraction of the Lions followers go to the Tests. Most are happy with the touring and that is usually a winning spree.

Gatland has tried to cod us into thinking that winning is everything - I don't think it is with regard to the Lions - otherwise there would have been more Lions wins in its history. It would seem to me that Gatland has completely missed the whole thing as to what the Lions are about.

If you ask the coaches and players then winning is everything if not why play and Woodward done far more damage to the Lions ethos than Gatland ever did. I have been lucky enough to have gone on 3 now NZ 05, SA 09 and Aus last time and whilst I had a fantastic and different experience on all 3 being on the winning side was definitely better than being on the losing side.

by GunsGerms Thu 12 Mar 2015, 5:07 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:Point still stands. Ireland has an obsession with Premiership football. That's a sport in another country. Yet they don't miss a chance to have a dig about "Da Brits" at any opportunity.

I shouldn't be surprised about the hypocrisy levels I suppose.

I agree wholeheartedly with Chunky Norwich on this one. I have no idea why premiership football is so popular in Ireland. The hypocrisy amongst some Irish people is really bizarre. Often the same people who will be cursing Britain will spend their weekends in the pub wearing English football jerseys singing English football chants in English accents. Its really weird. Premiership football is a dire spectacle too. I don't get it.

However your comment that its all take take take from Irish fans couldn't be further from the truth. Irish people spend approx a billion euros per annum on traveling or supporting their favorite British football team yet these football teams only ever give back to their own communities not Irish people. It is a really odd phenomenon in my opinion.

by Sin é Thu 12 Mar 2015, 5:30 pm

bedfordwelsh wrote:
Sin é wrote:
bedfordwelsh wrote:
Sin é wrote:I don't think it makes a difference whether the Lions win or not. Most the followers on the tour are just there for a good time - all it is is a touring side which is around for 2 months every 4 years.

Sin e,

Not strictly true, having a good time is a big part but winning at same time was even better especially seeing how quiet the Aussies were in and around Sydney that evening.

Only a fraction of the Lions followers go to the Tests. Most are happy with the touring and that is usually a winning spree.

Gatland has tried to cod us into thinking that winning is everything - I don't think it is with regard to the Lions - otherwise there would have been more Lions wins in its history. It would seem to me that Gatland has completely missed the whole thing as to what the Lions are about.

If you ask the coaches and players then winning is everything if not why play and Woodward done far more damage to the Lions ethos than Gatland ever did. I have been lucky enough to have gone on 3 now NZ 05, SA 09 and Aus last time and whilst I had a fantastic and different experience on all 3 being on the winning side was definitely better than being on the losing side.

The coaches/players & their families do care about winning ... it doesn't bother the fans too much though - they are going to party. After Woodward's disasterous tour to NZ, there was no shortage of Lions fans ready to part with their cash for the SA Lions Tour.

by bedfordwelsh Thu 12 Mar 2015, 9:28 pm

I agree about going for the party but most if not all I came across (not maybe their partners) had an interest in rugby and wanted to win.

For example I wouldn't of just gone to Australia, New Zealand or South Africa unless I combined it with the Lions or I wouldn't go there to watch the ashes as no interest in cricket etc.

by Cloggie Fri 13 Mar 2015, 12:10 am

Personally, I love the Lions tours and I have particularly enjoyed the last two of them (in 2009 and 2013). However, as good as some of the back-and-forth rugby on display was in 2009, the overall series loss really stung... For me, 2013 was slightly blighted by (what I felt to be) the somewhat disrespectful treatment of BOD, but I was still very happy with a wonderful series win. So, in summary, I believe that actual results in Lions tours matter a lot...

by Engine#4 Fri 13 Mar 2015, 12:26 am

Francis and the Walesonline.co.uk Rugby Section deserve each other. Neither is worth the click of a mouse.

by Nachos Jones Fri 13 Mar 2015, 8:21 am

I aid t about two years ago but I will say it again since it has again become a topic for discussion. I believe that Gatland made a mistake in selecting BOD for the Lions tour in the first place as he was not one of the best 3 performing 13's for the Lions. I feel Gatland bowed to media pressure to select him.

The way he dropped him for the third test was not done very well but was the correct decision.

As for the amount of Wels players starting, well that did annoy me as there were better options available than simply picking the Welsh but you cannot blame the guy for selecting the majority of the team from the team he coaches and knows so well. Its why I believe that Lions coaches should not be actively affiliated with a current home nations team when appointed.

I also do not believe that Gatland picked the Welsh players with an eye on giving them confidence to beat SH opposition, too big a risk to do that as had (if he believe it was a confidence thing holding the Welsh players back from beating SH sides) the Lions lost, it would have finished the Welsh players confidence off entirely.

by Chunky Norwich Fri 13 Mar 2015, 9:37 am

Exiledinborders wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
SecretFly wrote:...if b) is "about right" that seems to suggest the English and Irish contingents hadn't it in them to beat the Aussies.

Truth was different.

How is the truth was different?
Irish fans can speak about Ireland but England have beaten Australia in four out of their last five meetings so to suggest what after all were the best of the English team haven't got it in them to beat Australia was clearly nonsense.

I agree with most of Gatland's selections by the way.

But you're seeing it as a rugby fan and not through Gatland's eyes. Which is wholly simplistic.

Gatland plays a rigid gameplan. He knew by the time the 3rd test came around which of those could play his gameplan. And Which couldn't. He knew that Faletau and Lydiate tackle high up the rush defence all day, low around the legs to get Roberts over the ball as quickly as possible. The trade off is the carrying game, so the likes of Heaslip, Croft and Vunipola get shafted. Similarly Roberts - a one man gainline wrecker. That is what Gatland wants - a brute at 12. He'll start all day long, even if there is an amazingly talented footballing 12 from England on the plane bang in form. That's what you get when a coach sticks to a rigid gameplan.

But that's because Gatland wants to win. Not because he wants to try out his players against Australia so they have more experience.

I've read some daft things on here but that takes the biscuit.

by No 7&1/2 Fri 13 Mar 2015, 9:51 am

Gatland had a ridgid gameplan which you could say only suited Wlesh players but more likely he went with what he knew. He only took 1 proper 12 who then got injured leaving us light. We were lucky that a few men returned in the final test, Corbs was a god send and that there was an injury meaning we could strengthen the back row.

by beshocked Fri 13 Mar 2015, 9:54 am

Gatland didn't pick the best players but in the end he didn't need to as the Lions won.

As a consequence of Gatland picking so many Welshman for the Lions, Wales did lose to Japan convincingly. You at least have that as a consolation!

by Chunky Norwich Fri 13 Mar 2015, 9:56 am

beshocked wrote:Gatland didn't pick the best players but in the end he didn't need to as the Lions won.
!

Which players were the best ones that didn't get picked?

by Nachos Jones Fri 13 Mar 2015, 10:02 am

At the end of the day, the Lions tour was 2 years ago. The Lions won and that is pretty much how I will remember that tour.

by Tattie Scones RRN Fri 13 Mar 2015, 10:04 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Exiledinborders wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
SecretFly wrote:...if b) is "about right" that seems to suggest the English and Irish contingents hadn't it in them to beat the Aussies.

Truth was different.

How is the truth was different?
Irish fans can speak about Ireland but England have beaten Australia in four out of their last five meetings so to suggest what after all were the best of the English team haven't got it in them to beat Australia was clearly nonsense.

I agree with most of Gatland's selections by the way.

But you're seeing it as a rugby fan and not through Gatland's eyes. Which is wholly simplistic.

Gatland plays a rigid gameplan. He knew by the time the 3rd test came around which of those could play his gameplan. And Which couldn't. He knew that Faletau and Lydiate tackle high up the rush defence all day, low around the legs to get Roberts over the ball as quickly as possible. The trade off is the carrying game, so the likes of Heaslip, Croft and Vunipola get shafted. Similarly Roberts - a one man gainline wrecker. That is what Gatland wants - a brute at 12. He'll start all day long, even if there is an amazingly talented footballing 12 from England on the plane bang in form. That's what you get when a coach sticks to a rigid gameplan.

But that's because Gatland wants to win. Not because he wants to try out his players against Australia so they have more experience.

I've read some daft things on here but that takes the biscuit.

Oh the irony Rolling Eyes

by mckay1402 Fri 13 Mar 2015, 10:05 am

No 7&1/2 wrote:Gatland had a ridgid gameplan which you could say only suited Wlesh players but more likely he went with what he knew. He only took 1 proper 12 who then got injured leaving us light. We were lucky that a few men returned in the final test, Corbs was a god send and that there was an injury meaning we could strengthen the back row.

Foxy is a 12 that has been converted to a 13 so that's inaccurate

by Chunky Norwich Fri 13 Mar 2015, 10:11 am

mckay1402 wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:Gatland had a ridgid gameplan which you could say only suited Wlesh players but more likely he went with what he knew. He only took 1 proper 12 who then got injured leaving us light. We were lucky that a few men returned in the final test, Corbs was a god send and that there was an injury meaning we could strengthen the back row.

Foxy is a 12 that has been converted to a 13 so that's inaccurate

Surely it should read "was a 12". Which then makes it accurate.

by Sin é Fri 13 Mar 2015, 10:26 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
beshocked wrote:Gatland didn't pick the best players but in the end he didn't need to as the Lions won.
!

Which players were the best ones that didn't get picked?

Conor Murray (for Phillips)
Sean O'Brien (for Warburton)

He also picked a half fit Tommy Bowe because since he was playing in Wales, people thought he was Welsh Wink

by Chunky Norwich Fri 13 Mar 2015, 10:37 am

Sin é wrote:
Conor Murray (for Phillips)
Sean O'Brien (for Warburton)

He also picked a half fit Tommy Bowe because since he was playing in Wales, people thought he was Welsh

I thought we were talking about the 3rd test? O'brien started that test. And Murray played half an hour. Phillips was the logical choice given both of their form on the tour.

So at best, you've come up with just one very, very iffy example.

by Sin é Fri 13 Mar 2015, 10:41 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Sin é wrote:
Conor Murray (for Phillips)
Sean O'Brien (for Warburton)

He also picked a half fit Tommy Bowe because since he was playing in Wales, people thought he was Welsh

I thought we were talking about the 3rd test? O'brien started that test. And Murray played half an hour. Phillips was the logical choice given both of their form on the tour.

So at best, you've come up with just one very, very iffy example.

O'Brien would not have started except Warburton got injured. O'Brien should have started the 1 and 2nd Test.

Phillips was half injured (missed the first test) and in very poor form. It was noticeable every time that Murray came on and Sexton was reunited with his halfback partner, the team played better.

Murray was the form scrumhalf on the tour.

by GunsGerms Fri 13 Mar 2015, 10:48 am

I think Murray really benefited from the coaching he got on that tour from Howley. Thoughts? His passing really sped up and he stopped taking lots of steps and then passing.

Aparently POC approached Lydiate for one on one chop tackle lessons.

Lydiate was the unsung hero of that tour IMO.

by Chunky Norwich Fri 13 Mar 2015, 10:50 am

Sin é wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
Sin é wrote:
Conor Murray (for Phillips)
Sean O'Brien (for Warburton)

He also picked a half fit Tommy Bowe because since he was playing in Wales, people thought he was Welsh

I thought we were talking about the 3rd test? O'brien started that test. And Murray played half an hour. Phillips was the logical choice given both of their form on the tour.

So at best, you've come up with just one very, very iffy example.

O'Brien would not have started except Warburton got injured. O'Brien should have started the 1 and 2nd Test.

Phillips was half injured (missed the first test) and in very poor form. It was noticeable every time that Murray came on and Sexton was reunited with his halfback partner, the team played better.

Murray was the form scrumhalf on the tour.

Disagree. And thankfully so did the series winning coach.

by GunsGerms Fri 13 Mar 2015, 10:54 am

Surely you can agree that Philips underperformed quite significantly? He was even kinda lazy at times.

by Sin é Fri 13 Mar 2015, 10:57 am

GunsGerms wrote:I think Murray really benefited from the coaching he got on that tour from Howley. Thoughts?

Aparently POC approached Lydiate for one on one chop tackle lessons. Lydiate was the star of that tour IMO.

Murray has said he learned a lot from Howley on the tour, but the big thing he learned on the tour was that he was as good, if not better than anyone else from seeing them up close and training with them.

Why he wasn't the Test starter I don't know. He showed very good form early on with the dirt trackers. I remember him making Stuart Hogg look like an outhalf.

by beshocked Fri 13 Mar 2015, 11:03 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
beshocked wrote:Gatland didn't pick the best players but in the end he didn't need to as the Lions won.
!

Which players were the best ones that didn't get picked?

Kelly Brown and Chris Robshaw - who were two of the top players in the 6 nations that year - instead he picked an unfit Croft and Lydiate.

Mike Brown was also overlooked too.

To be honest I think Gatland got a bit lucky - this was not a vintage Aussie side. His flaws and poor decisions have been swept under the carpet because the Lions won.

by Marshes Fri 13 Mar 2015, 11:04 am

Sin é wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
beshocked wrote:Gatland didn't pick the best players but in the end he didn't need to as the Lions won.
!

Which players were the best ones that didn't get picked?

Conor Murray (for Phillips)
Sean O'Brien (for Warburton)

He also picked a half fit Tommy Bowe because since he was playing in Wales, people thought he was Welsh

I remember at the time a lot of Irish fans even unhappy with Murray, saying his supply was too slow, so I don't think he was clearly ahead of Philips for the Lions. Granted he played well in the first two tests when he came on and the build up games. SOB for me would be ahead of Warburton.

I think the selection has as much to do with combinations for Gatland as anything else, Welsh players knowing each other's games better and how to implement his game etc. When it was a tight call for a spot, he probably erred to the Welsh side.

Mad that it is still a bone of contention now.

by Nachos Jones Fri 13 Mar 2015, 11:10 am

Marshes wrote:

I remember at the time a lot of Irish fans even unhappy with Murray, saying his supply was too slow, so I don't think he was clearly ahead of Philips for the Lions. Granted he played well in the first two tests when he came on and the build up games. SOB for me would be ahead of Warburton.

I think the selection has as much to do with combinations for Gatland as anything else, Welsh players knowing each other's games better and how to implement his game etc. When it was a tight call for a spot, he probably erred to the Welsh side.

Mad that it is still a bone of contention now.

Although Murray improved a lot under the tutelage of Howley, he was not as slow and sloppy as people think. He was at the time already a very accomplished 9 and, with the exception of Parra, the best 9 in the NH so clearly ahead of Phillips. I think Phillips was even lucky to be on the tour myself.

by Sin é Fri 13 Mar 2015, 11:11 am

Marshes wrote:
Sin é wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
beshocked wrote:Gatland didn't pick the best players but in the end he didn't need to as the Lions won.
!

Which players were the best ones that didn't get picked?

Conor Murray (for Phillips)
Sean O'Brien (for Warburton)

He also picked a half fit Tommy Bowe because since he was playing in Wales, people thought he was Welsh

I remember at the time a lot of Irish fans even unhappy with Murray, saying his supply was too slow, so I don't think he was clearly ahead of Philips for the Lions. Granted he played well in the first two tests when he came on and the build up games. SOB for me would be ahead of Warburton.

I think the selection has as much to do with combinations for Gatland as anything else, Welsh players knowing each other's games better and how to implement his game etc. When it was a tight call for a spot, he probably erred to the Welsh side.

Mad that it is still a bone of contention now.

What would you expect? He is from Munster. Half the people of Ireland live in Leinster. Same with Peter O'Mahony and Keith Earls. They don't rate them either.

If he was going for existing partnerships, he would have had a Heislip/Murray/Sexton partnership.

The only reason its brought up now is because some are claiming that the only reason we Irish are critical of Gatland is because he dropped BOD. That isn't so.

by Chunky Norwich Fri 13 Mar 2015, 11:15 am

beshocked wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
beshocked wrote:Gatland didn't pick the best players but in the end he didn't need to as the Lions won.
!

Which players were the best ones that didn't get picked?

Kelly Brown and Chris Robshaw - who were two of the top players in the 6 nations that year - instead he picked an unfit Croft and Lydiate.

Mike Brown was also overlooked too.

To be honest I think Gatland got a bit lucky - this was not a vintage Aussie side. His flaws and poor decisions have been swept under the carpet because the Lions won.

I'm totally with you on Croft. One of the most overrated players in the northern hemisphere. I would have Robshaw above him any day. Especially when you have enough lineout options without him.

by GunsGerms Fri 13 Mar 2015, 11:21 am

Sin é wrote:
GunsGerms wrote:I think Murray really benefited from the coaching he got on that tour from Howley. Thoughts?

Aparently POC approached Lydiate for one on one chop tackle lessons. Lydiate was the star of that tour IMO.

Murray has said he learned a lot from Howley on the tour, but the big thing he learned on the tour was that he was as good, if not better than anyone else from seeing them up close and training with them.

Why he wasn't the Test starter I don't know. He showed very good form early on with the dirt trackers. I remember him making Stuart Hogg look like an outhalf.

Surely you can see his passing has improved beyond recognition? According to Drico in a recent interview Murray has always been one of Ireland's best defenders. His positioning is exemplary. His passing, decision making and tactical kicking is first class now too.

by GunsGerms Fri 13 Mar 2015, 11:22 am

Nachos Jones wrote:
Marshes wrote:

I remember at the time a lot of Irish fans even unhappy with Murray, saying his supply was too slow, so I don't think he was clearly ahead of Philips for the Lions. Granted he played well in the first two tests when he came on and the build up games. SOB for me would be ahead of Warburton.

I think the selection has as much to do with combinations for Gatland as anything else, Welsh players knowing each other's games better and how to implement his game etc. When it was a tight call for a spot, he probably erred to the Welsh side.

Mad that it is still a bone of contention now.

Although Murray improved a lot under the tutelage of Howley, he was not as slow and sloppy as people think. He was at the time already a very accomplished 9 and, with the exception of Parra, the best 9 in the NH so clearly ahead of Phillips. I think Phillips was even lucky to be on the tour myself.

His passing was dire. He was ridiculously slow and sloppy and took too many steps. His box kicking and decision making has vastly improved too. By the end of the tour he was better than Philips but that was mainly because Philips looked like he wasnt bothered most of the time.

by GunsGerms Fri 13 Mar 2015, 11:25 am

beshocked wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
beshocked wrote:Gatland didn't pick the best players but in the end he didn't need to as the Lions won.
!

Which players were the best ones that didn't get picked?

Kelly Brown and Chris Robshaw - who were two of the top players in the 6 nations that year - instead he picked an unfit Croft and Lydiate.

Mike Brown was also overlooked too.

To be honest I think Gatland got a bit lucky - this was not a vintage Aussie side. His flaws and poor decisions have been swept under the carpet because the Lions won.

I agree. Australia were quite poor and had a comparitively inexperienced side because half their stars were dropped due to bad behavour. They were in turmoil.

Tactically the Lions were poor enough. It really should have been a clean sweep IMO.

by Nachos Jones Fri 13 Mar 2015, 11:29 am

GunsGerms,

Although he could be ponderous at times, I never really saw Murray as being as slow and sloppy as made out to be. By the time of the Lions tour, he was already firmly Irelands first choice 9, was playing very good rugby and had a very good 6N. To me, other than Parra (possibly Care as well) he was the stand out 9 in the NH. He was far ahead of Phillips.

He improved a lot on that tour and Howley helped him to become the fully rounded 9 he is now and I would say he is up there with the best 9's in world rugby.

He was not dire leading up to the Lions, he was playing some great rugby.

by Sponsored content