Lions 2017: It begins... with a fixture list

First topic message reminder :

Friends, the day we've dreaded and anticipated has arrived. The Lions 2017 build-up has officially begun. Don't cringe or dread this moment, stand up to it like an impending wave, run head-long into this moment while shouting "I will not be a-feared!"

We have a fixture list, and it's a doozie:


In between the tests, the buildup matches, the hype, the songs, the slow-motion Sky trailers with the Inception soundtrack piped in, and Finn Russell using the stuffed lion to knock over George Ford's Lego pirate ship, one fixture stands out:
27 June 2017 - WestPac Stadium, Wellington - B&I Lions v Hurricanes.

Oh yes, a combined Glasgow Warriors and Bath side against the mighty 'Canes - that is the Cordon Bleu recipe for awesome attacking rugby, right there.

This thread isn't about predictions or squads, captains or bolters, let's just revel in the moment and talk about how great this is all going to be. Roll on 2017!

No 7&1/2 wrote:Fair enough if you think he'll go, just can't see it. Too many good players competing in that position.

You are ruling him out on age. Thats not right. Matfield, Thorn & Shaw are examples of players who have all performed well into their late 30s. I can't see why POC shouldn't as well. They maybe good players, but do they have his leadership qualities and experience?

I'm not ruling out on age, I'm saying in 18 months the players that are already competing on level grounds should have surpassed him. How many locks will be going? Start naming who should be around by then, it's an impressive list and 1 which leads me to thinking POC won't be one of the stronger candidates. Would be different if it was now.

Sin é wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

Sin é wrote:Its much more interesting as to who will coach the team. Please god we don't have to tolerate fatland again.

He would just pick as many Kiwis as possible again and it would be ridiculous.

I think Lancaster would be good (and its time the Saxons were given the gig again). I don't think he would try and bring the whole of England just to keep the natives happy as Fatland did with Wales.

HC: Lancaster. Backs: Schmidt. Forwards: Vern Cotter. Defence: Shaun Edwards.

I would weigh in behind Lancaster too. I think he would do a good job.

It'd be fun if you could find a way to shoehorn all 4 national coaches into the final team

GunsGerms wrote:

Sin é wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

Sin é wrote:Its much more interesting as to who will coach the team. Please god we don't have to tolerate fatland again.

He would just pick as many Kiwis as possible again and it would be ridiculous.

I think Lancaster would be good (and its time the Saxons were given the gig again). I don't think he would try and bring the whole of England just to keep the natives happy as Fatland did with Wales.

HC: Lancaster. Backs: Schmidt. Forwards: Vern Cotter. Defence: Shaun Edwards.

I would weigh in behind Lancaster too. I think he would do a good job.

Hang on, so Gatland (Yes I have the gall to call him by his real name in an adult conversation), who has won 2 GS's, another 6N, made a semi final of a RWC and took a winning lions tour to Australia would not be your choice because...

A) He will select as many 'kiwi's' as possible?

B) He would keep Britain and Ireland happy by selecting the whole of Wales?

I just want you to think about what you've written there, have a good think about it, and get back to me when sense returns, unless your bigotry doesn't allow for sense mind?

He isnt very popular though is he? He also has a history of falling out with people and making ill advised comments regarding other 6 nations teams. So I dont think he would be the best choice.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'm not ruling out on age, I'm saying in 18 months the players that are already competing on level grounds should have surpassed him. How many locks will be going? Start naming who should be around by then, it's an impressive list and 1 which leads me to thinking POC won't be one of the stronger candidates. Would be different if it was now.

POC will be well ahead on leadership though (along with AW Jones). And there are not too many standout leaders at the moment. I'd have POC & AWJ way ahead of every other eligible player for captain as well. Thats is what will separate them for the newbies (who lets not forget will be on their first tour). AW Jones will be in his prime then - I'd have him in there with one of the young fellows probably. But I would not rule out POC being brought along even if it is just to try and help the team gel.

On the last tour, it showed a clip of POC (who wasn't captain) tearing into the rest of them for not looking out for Owen Farrell (as in giving him enough protection). Who is going to point out stuff like that. You need someone with gravitas.

We ll pick this up in 18 months!

Fanster wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

Sin é wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

Sin é wrote:Its much more interesting as to who will coach the team. Please god we don't have to tolerate fatland again.

He would just pick as many Kiwis as possible again and it would be ridiculous.

I think Lancaster would be good (and its time the Saxons were given the gig again). I don't think he would try and bring the whole of England just to keep the natives happy as Fatland did with Wales.

HC: Lancaster. Backs: Schmidt. Forwards: Vern Cotter. Defence: Shaun Edwards.

I would weigh in behind Lancaster too. I think he would do a good job.

Hang on, so Gatland (Yes I have the gall to call him by his real name in an adult conversation), who has won 2 GS's, another 6N, made a semi final of a RWC and took a winning lions tour to Australia would not be your choice because...

A) He will select as many 'kiwi's' as possible?

B) He would keep Britain and Ireland happy by selecting the whole of Wales?

I just want you to think about what you've written there, have a good think about it, and get back to me when sense returns, unless your bigotry doesn't allow for sense mind?

I've just thought about it again. So what? He won a few games (but has rarely beaten a SH side). He is still a gobshite.

I think it's impossible to pick a team now with the amount of good players around, I think in most positions there are at least three players who would feel they're in with a shout of selection. If I had to pick now I'd go for:

15. Hogg
14. Watson
13. Bennett
12. Roberts
11. North
10. Sexton
9. Murray
8. Faletau
7. Warburton
6. O'Brien
5. Gray
4. Launchbury
3. Coles
2. George
1. Corbisiero

16. Healy
17. Destiny from the street corner (only youngish hooker I could think of)
18. Lee
19. Gray
20. Vunipola
21. Hidalgo-Clyne
22. Russell/ Ford (literally nothing between them in the Bath/Glasgow games and Scotland/ England ones)
23. Halfpenny

You have to laugh. We're 2 years out from the series and the two main subjects of debate on this thread are; whether a player who is retiring from international rugby after the Rugby World Cup should tour and whether or not Gatland is a gobshoite.

Roll on 2017

It'll be one of Schmidt, Cotter or Gatland and if they win the series they'll take over from Hansen. Although you can't help but feel that in a tour environment Lancaster's ethos based camp would make him a suitable manager with one of the others as head coach.

I don't rate Lancaster all that highly (obviously he's a very good coach indeed, just not one of the very few world class coaches out there) but I'd prefer him to get the job over Schmidt. We would want to get the most out of Schmidt before he leaves and I don't want him spending a year on Lions duty.

There are other reasons why I'd be disappointed to see Schmidt selected- he would be a very unpopular Lions coach outside Ireland. He is known for his meticulous detail and preparation and in the short space of time he has, he would surely pick the players who learn his methods the quickest and rely on those already familiar with them. So you're looking at a disproportionately high number of Irish players which is going to be as bad for the health of the Lions concept as it was when Gatland took a similar line.

I seriously dislike it when the Lions structure their style of play and even their selections around the style of one Home Nations team and for this reason I prefer to see coaches who are not currently in charge of any home nation get the job.

Don't think the arguement is whether Gatland is a gobshoite, more that is he suitable to head coach again

Personally, I'd have:-

Head coach: Joe Schmidt
Backs coach: Gregor Townsend
Forwards coach: Graham Rowntree
Defence coach: Shaun Edwards

I'm not so sure about Toonie as a backs coach it never really worked for Scotland, personally I'd go:

Director of Rugby type role: Stuart Lancaster
Head coach: Gregor Townsend
Defence Coach: Sean Edwards
Forwards coach: Graham Rowntree
Backs coach: Joe Schmidt
Captain: Jonny Gray
Vice-Captain: Jamie Roberts

Notch wrote:I don't rate Lancaster all that highly (obviously he's a very good coach indeed, just not one of the very few world class coaches out there) but I'd prefer him to get the job over Schmidt. We would want to get the most out of Schmidt before he leaves and I don't want him spending a year on Lions duty.

There are other reasons why I'd be disappointed to see Schmidt selected- he would be a very unpopular Lions coach outside Ireland. He is known for his meticulous detail and preparation and in the short space of time he has, he would surely pick the players who learn his methods the quickest and rely on those already familiar with them. So you're looking at a disproportionately high number of Irish players which is going to be as bad for the health of the Lions concept as it was when Gatland took a similar line.

I seriously dislike it when the Lions structure their style of play and even their selections around the style of one Home Nations team and for this reason I prefer to see coaches who are not currently in charge of any home nation get the job.

Very well said. Would be great to have 13 irish players starting though...

GunsGerms wrote:Think the Lions should stop off and play Fiji, Samoa and Tonga rather than some of the super 14 teams.

+1 for this. Do a bit to help the PI nations.

IanBru wrote:Friends, the day we've dreaded and anticipated has arrived. The Lions 2017 build-up has officially begun. Don't cringe or dread this moment, stand up to it like an impending wave, run head-long into this moment while shouting "I will not be a-feared!"

We have a fixture list, and it's a doozie:


In between the tests, the buildup matches, the hype, the songs, the slow-motion Sky trailers with the Inception soundtrack piped in, and Finn Russell using the stuffed lion to knock over George Ford's Lego pirate ship, one fixture stands out:
27 June 2017 - WestPac Stadium, Wellington - B&I Lions v Hurricanes.

Oh yes, a combined Glasgow Warriors and Bath side against the mighty 'Canes - that is the Cordon Bleu recipe for awesome attacking rugby, right there.

This thread isn't about predictions or squads, captains or bolters, let's just revel in the moment and talk about how great this is all going to be. Roll on 2017!

What's a doozie ?

demosthenes wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Think the Lions should stop off and play Fiji, Samoa and Tonga rather than some of the super 14 teams.

+1 for this.  Do a bit to help the PI nations.  

I agree in principle but it's not really practical, we view it from a european point of view that it's a short journey to the next country when it's simply not the case in the case of the Pacific Islands. Furthermore when it comes to warm ups the clue is in the name, make no mistake the Pacific Islands would be full blooded test matches and by no means warm ups. The only possible way would be to add an extra week on the beginning of the tour and play Fiji on a Friday, midweek team plays Tonga on the Tuesday and finish it off by playing Samoa the following Sunday before heading over to New Zealand, but the injuries and fatigue that would induce would be rather challenging before the tour even began.

The only way would be to end the club season a week or two early perhaps by playing club games every week of the six nations and maybe halving the play-offs so it's just the top two. It's a price worth paying to aid the PIs once every twelve years but whether or not the clubs would allow it is another matter.

demosthenes wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Think the Lions should stop off and play Fiji, Samoa and Tonga rather than some of the super 14 teams.

+1 for this.  Do a bit to help the PI nations.  

This is a great idea, however in certain cases, Fiji especially the money would go to a certain few peoples pockets, and Fijin rugby wouldn't be helped at all!

Steve_rugby wrote:What's a doozie ?

Ohio slang - an amazing or outstanding example of its kind.

Closest UK equivalent would be... a humdinger?

BamBam wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:

BamBam wrote:Oh go on then, I'll kick it off

Hogg, Watson, Joseph, Henshaw, North, Sexton, Murray, Marler, ??, Cole, Lawes, Gray, POM, Warburton, Vunipola

??, Healy, Lee, Launchbury, Itoje, Webb, Ford, JD2[/quote

North?????? On what form

My first thought was Nowell or Seymour.. Then I thought the Welsh might get upset if I only included one of their players

This one won't, I have and always will support the Lions regardless of what the make up of the team is.

Years away, and the backdrop is already set as "arrogant British too proud to play a test in the South Island".

Hoe do the lions management keep messing up in these ways?

With two of the three tests in Auckland and matches versus all five SXV sides if the SXV sides are able to play their full strength sides, however unlikely, this is as hard a tour as it gets for the number of matches in any one country.

Trouble is, the players that may be rested for the SXV sides may not just be the ABs but the key non AB SXV players as they will be at the business end of that comp as well. Hopefully it's not a farce.

No doubt Wales will have to save the day again and then be blamed for the manner of their victory. No pleasing some people.

Yup Corbs and O'Brien the Welsh saviours!

Perhaps a game against a combined PI team mid way through the tour at largest venue with profits split between PI Unions, could also occur during Aus tour

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yup Corbs and O'Brien the Welsh saviours!

The saviour was Halfpenny who scored most of the points, just like Jenks the last time we won a tour.

Isn't Vickery the bookies favourite for the captaincy?

I'm going to put in a good word for Mike Ford as backs/attack coach.

king_carlos wrote:Isn't Vickery the bookies favourite for the captaincy?

Dont be ridiculous, he retired last week.

My two hopes for the head coach are that they aren't a then current national one, and that they construct a gameplan around the best players.  I don't care if the Lions win or (most likely) lose, just as long as I get to watch B&I's absolute best play rugby that they demonstrably enjoy and maximises their talents.

hawalsh - I must say that how the Lions play their rugby is a huge part of these tours being a success in my eyes. If we want to continue with what is an old fashioned tradition that disrupts the rugby calendar, and a fair few players careers with injury, then it should be an advertisement for how rugby can best be played. I don't want to see Baabaas rugby but a focus on positive, attacking rugby is a must for me.

I'd love to see a side such as below running out playing positive, free flowing rugby.

1.Healy
2.Best - Why are most home nations hookers getting on a bit, unproven quantities or inconsistent in their basics at international level? Or a very naughty boy.
3.Cole
4.J Gray
5.Lawes
6.O'Brien
7.Tipuric
8.Morgan

9.Murray
10.Sexton

11.North
12.Roberts
13.Joseph
14.Nowell - Hopefully someone like Wade can come through for a home nations side following the world cup
15.Hogg

King

Positive free flowing rugby is a myth! Even if you impliment a strikingly good looking attack plan and base your game around it you will still come up short, look at Bath!

This idea that teams who play pretty win because theyre positive irks me, NZ do noot play pretty, they kick more than anyone else in world rugby, then live off mistakes, they only play rugby in opposition territory!!

But for arguments sake, who would you say plays flowing rugby? Which team would you like the lions to emulate?

What I love about this thread is every time someone says something as a joke someone else will chime in to debate it as a serious topic.

Fanster, Bath, Glasgow Warriors and the Huricanes all reached their respective finals by playing the positive free-flowing rugby you say doesn't exist.

...and Glasgow won theirs.

#JustSaying
#WhyAmIUsingHashtags

LondonTiger wrote:With two tests in Auckland, not sure I will bother going.

Yes its probably better that you keep away.

Notch wrote:I don't rate Lancaster all that highly (obviously he's a very good coach indeed, just not one of the very few world class coaches out there) but I'd prefer him to get the job over Schmidt. We would want to get the most out of Schmidt before he leaves and I don't want him spending a year on Lions duty.

There are other reasons why I'd be disappointed to see Schmidt selected- he would be a very unpopular Lions coach outside Ireland. He is known for his meticulous detail and preparation and in the short space of time he has, he would surely pick the players who learn his methods the quickest and rely on those already familiar with them. So you're looking at a disproportionately high number of Irish players which is going to be as bad for the health of the Lions concept as it was when Gatland took a similar line.

I seriously dislike it when the Lions structure their style of play and even their selections around the style of one Home Nations team and for this reason I prefer to see coaches who are not currently in charge of any home nation get the job.

Taking a squad of players who know each other is the only way the Lions stand a chance of keeping the scores respectable. Schmidt has shown that he values teamwork over individualism so I agree he would take pods of players that regularly play together. It just about worked for Gatland in Australia who didn't pick the best individuals but the best team based on familiarity. It is indeed a myth that a scratch collection of players stand any chance of putting phases together let alone have an attacking style against the consummate professionalism of the All Blacks.

I'd rather this tour was ten games less but it will happen, Gatland would be my choice because he would pick mostly Welsh players, but he wouldn't want it, because he knows he can't win it and it wouldn't help his ambition to be the ABs coach. Why not give Sir Clive a shot at redemption now he can take er... a more objective look at the players?

What's wrong with Auckland?

Nothing its a fantastic place.well apart from congested motorways that is.

I still can't understand why people are picking North in their sides and as a few have mentioned in these days of shorter tours then I think whoever the coach is he will pick pods or combos of players he knows can play together.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Nothing its a fantastic place.well apart from congested motorways that is.

Fair enough, just seemed some people had a bit of a downer on it!

aucklandlaurie wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:With two tests in Auckland, not sure I will bother going.

Yes its probably better that you keep away.

Not to worry I will.

Would have liked to go on the tour and see two tests, but after last summer never wish to see a match in Auckland again - and it is too far to travel for just a single test.

In general I love NZ. Excluding Auckland the people are fantastic and welcoming, the country beautiful.

The Great Aukster wrote:Taking a squad of players who know each other is the only way the Lions stand a chance of keeping the scores respectable.

And that's the crux of the issue. To carry on the Lions ethos we should aspire to blend the best of the four Home Nations. To compete we are better off modelling our team after one dominant Home Nation. Given the Lions don't represent a country, but rather (as far as I'm concerned anyway) is just a chance to see players we don't normally get to see playing together at the elite level, I would rather lose and try to get a good representation of all the best players in the home unions in the team and play an ambitious brand of rugby than win with a team based on the core of one team while playing pragmatic rugby.

If it's a case of getting together a functional team in a short space of time which is 'Ireland plus Guests' or 'Wales plus Guests' I would rather see us stop the whole thing altogether. It's an amateur era concept and it's charm lies in that fact. Once you apply the hard logic of win at all costs professionalism to it, the romance is gone and it's just a drain on seeing your best players and possibly coaches getting taken off provincial/international duty for the sake of a money-spinner.

Fanster wrote:King

Positive free flowing rugby is a myth! Even if you impliment a strikingly good looking attack plan and base your game around it you will still come up short, look at Bath!

This idea that teams who play pretty win because theyre positive irks me, NZ do noot play pretty, they kick more than anyone else in world rugby, then live off mistakes, they only play rugby in opposition territory!!

But for arguments sake, who would you say plays flowing rugby? Which team would you like the lions to emulate?

As said I don't want to see Baabaas rugby Fanster.

Contrary to your argument, the idea that the ABs don't play positive rugby irks me. They play in the right areas of the field but the second it's on they take their chance. It is intelligent rugby but a game plan based around just about every player in their side having the skills to take advantage when the space appears.

If you look at the side I suggested:

1.Healy 2.Best 3.Cole 4.J Gray 5.Lawes 6.O'Brien 7.Tipuric 8.Morgan
9.Murray 10.Sexton 11.North 12.Roberts 13.Joesph 14.Nowell 15.Hogg

It isn't one built to solely hurl the ball left and right hoping something comes off. Murray and Sexton make sure you play your rugby in the right areas of the field. Roberts can run a defensive line and every player in that backline is solid (or better) in defence.

Similarly in the forwards. Best, Cole and Jonny Gray off huge work rate in defence. O'Brien and Tipuric can consistently apply pressure at the breakdown. Lawes offers a disruptive presence and can dominate collisions.

When the turnover comes though the forwards have two flankers who are excellent link men and ball carriers. Two huge ball carriers in Healy and Morgan. Plus two second rows who are adept at linking with the backs.

Likewise with the backs, when the chance comes those players are equipped to take advantage.

I don't have a problem with the 'defence is the start of attack' philosophy. My issue is when sides predominantly use their strong defence as a means to kick goals rather than create attacking opportunities. This is a game plan repeatedly seen to defeat poor international sides but fail against the very best.

Fiji have a 100% record against the Lions, interesting stat

"The 1977 Lions played Fiji in Suva at the end of their New Zealand tour. Fresh off a 3-1 series loss to the All Blacks, they were tripped up 25-21 by a Fiji side".

http://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/international/70156603/Fiji-rugby-fails-in-cheeky-bid-to-host-British-and-Irish-Lions-en-route-to-New-Zealand

Why does everyone keep trying to move Sean O'Brien to 6? He rarely, if ever, plays there. On the last Lions Tour, Tom Croft kept him out at blindside initially which says it all.

Also, I think George Ford (with a world cup & 2 more 6Ns under his belt), could be the starting outhalf. Sexton has just had an injury riddled season with concussion/injury. Ford was the best outhalf in the last 6Ns.

edit: This is the Best Blindside in Europe, seen choke tackling a shark here.

IanBru wrote:Fanster, Bath, Glasgow Warriors and the Huricanes all reached their respective finals by playing the positive free-flowing rugby you say doesn't exist.

...and Glasgow won theirs.

#JustSaying
#WhyAmIUsingHashtags

.... and Glasgow have brought in a couple of pacific islanders who are key to the implementation of that style (and Bath are doing the same)! International teams can't really do that.

Sin é wrote:

IanBru wrote:Fanster, Bath, Glasgow Warriors and the Huricanes all reached their respective finals by playing the positive free-flowing rugby you say doesn't exist.

...and Glasgow won theirs.

#JustSaying
#WhyAmIUsingHashtags

.... and Glasgow have brought in a couple of pacific islanders who are key to the implementation of that style (and Bath are doing the same)! International teams can't really do that.

I beg to differ...
We are very capable of chucking in Pacific Islanders, in fact we could easily produce an entire team born outside of Britain and Ireland:


15. Maitland
14. Rokuduguni
13. Payne
12. Tuilagi
11. Visser
10. Anscombe
9. McKibbin
8. Faletau
7. Vunipola
6. Nathan Hughes
5. Toolis
4. Evans
3. Nel
2. Hartley
1. Vunipola

Is 6 Pacific Islanders enough?