Lions 2017

First topic message reminder :

I understand and respect all the arguments against this kind of post 18 months before but the proper journalists are all having a so we might as well. It happens after every tournament.

For what it's worth I'd pick:

1. Marler
2. Hartley
3. Nel
4. J. Gray
5. AW Jones
6. Faletau
7. Warburton
8. Vunipola
9. Webb
10. Sexton
11. North
12. Henshaw
13. Joseph
14. Watson
15. Hogg

16. McGrath
17. MacInally
18. Lee
19. Itoje
20. Stander
21. Youngs
22. Biggar
23. Halfpenny

LordDowlais wrote:

TJ wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

TJ wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

beshocked wrote:
Personally I think the Scots players aren't as good as the Scots think they are. I believe that the Scottish players are benefiting from a superior coach like Cotter.

If you were Welsh person saying that they would want you executed...

More paranoid twaddle - he gets the same answer from the scots fans as you would.  We are not precious and paranoid - we know who we are

So where is the accusations of a pathetic English desire to belittle everything/everyone else? These accusations only come out against the Welsh, just like it's apparently only the welsh who comment negatively on referees. That's the truth.

Well find me a scots poster who has done these things?  we don't.  Its paranoid twaddle I am afraid - jeepers if we called foul on every time some called the scots rubbish we would never post anything else ;-)  come on - quote a post where a scots fan has made those accusations.  Just one post please.  Put up or shut up.

Go on the recent Glasgow V Ulster thread, there are plenty of Scottish members moaning about the ref on that thread.

Indeed there are - but that wasn't the point - Mickey said.
He said "So where is the accusations of a pathetic English desire to belittle everything/everyone else? These accusations only come out against the Welsh, just like it's apparently only the welsh who comment negatively on referees." so I challenged him to find a post where any scots fan has said these things - you won't find one as it doesn't happen

Enough - lets get back to bickering about selection.

LordDowlais wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:I will eat my hat if any Scottish players start a test fot the Lions next summer, there might be one on the bench, Hogg, but that is it, there are far suppirior players from England,Ireland and Wales in every position.

Even Hogg would not be a cert.

In certain positions its easy to look good when you have other players around you giving you an armchair. Some feed off scraps and still shine, maybe not as much as  those with the  best around them but that doesn't necessarily mean they are better players.

WTF. Look, when Scotland start winning more than one or two games in the 6N on a regular basis then we can start considering them for the Lions.

In 1997 England were the top home nations side by far. In the 5N they beat Wales by 21 points, Scotland by 28 and Ireland by 40. Yet they only fielded 6 players compared to 9 from the 3 other nations in the first test and it would have been 5 and 10 had Howley been fit. Maybe even 4 and 11 if Quinnell wasn't injured either.

You can say the same about the 2001 tour too.

A good bunch of that dominant England side didn't even make the tour.

Rubbish. Why would you judge players on a teams win loss ratio? For me there would be 4 in definite contention for starts: Nel, J Gray, Hardie and Hogg.

Mikey dragon

Everyone hypes up their players. When you watch a player more it's natural to have a bias towards them.

TJ you only believe Jonny Gray was the standout because he's a Scotsman. Gray did not outperform Kruis. Kruis ran through J. Gray's brother against you too. Kruis' influence on that game was much greater.

Lineouts are very important to a lock, more important than tackling.

A 2nd row is not a flanker. Their primary job is not to tackle everything that moves. Workrate is important but there's more to that than just having a nice tackle count.

J.Gray did not do noticeable damage to opposition lineouts. Didn't stop England's lineout once.

Win your own ball, attack the opposition lineout - surely that's what a lock should be able to do. At least one lock anyhow.

J.Gray is not an enforcer either, certainly when you look at his carrying stats, unimpressive indeed.

To say Farrell is not in the same league as Sexton and Biggar is just silly. Of course he is.

As for Russell = flaky and unreliable. A lesser version of Ford.

I agree, neither of the Gray brothers for me are valid at the moment of touring form on form. Richie is simply a big lump and useless in the lineout.

fa0019 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:I will eat my hat if any Scottish players start a test fot the Lions next summer, there might be one on the bench, Hogg, but that is it, there are far suppirior players from England,Ireland and Wales in every position.

Even Hogg would not be a cert.

At the moment can you say the followng?

Any better 3 than Nel?
Any better openside than Hardie?
Any better 15 than Hogg?

I don't think LD gets that we're talking about recent form, rather than trying to guess who will be there in 2017.

So on recent form, yes, there some TH props better than Nel, arguably both Lee and Cole. I don't think Nel was that good in the 6N and is being overhyped, but he would still tour.

Warburton and SOB suffered injuries, Haskell isn't a 7 despite forming part of an effective back-row. The stats also look good for Hardie, he would be starter.

No 15 better than Hogg in the 6N.

There would also be a case for Laidlaw at 9 on recent form. Besides these Dickinson, Gray (either brother) and Seymour should also be on the tour.

fa0019 agree about Richie. With his size and attributes he should be a excellent player. I still believe that if Sarries signed him instead of Sale 4-5 years ago, Sarries would have turned him into a much better player. Was a fool to go to Sale in my opinion.


2nd row is a very competitive area with the likes of Charteris,AWJ,Launchbury,Lawes,J.Gray,Itoje and Kruis potentially all in the mix. Could be another bolter or two too.

TJ wrote:
Indeed there are - but that wasn't the point - Mickey said.
He said "So where is the accusations of a pathetic English desire to belittle everything/everyone else? These accusations only come out against the Welsh, just like it's apparently only the welsh who comment negatively on referees." so I challenged him to find a post where any scots fan has said these things - you won't find one as it doesn't happen

Tattie said it about the Welsh - it's quoted. I challenged this and got complained about. This is me pointing out facts when you call me out, I'm not bickering.

Of course I am biased towards Gray cos he is a scot - we all are towards are own players. However even allowing for that I really think he was an absolute standout. He is a lifter not a jumper in lineouts usually but still took some steals - thats the role the coach has for him. Ritchie is the main jumper being taller and scotland often throw lighter players in the air as well - at 20 stone he is hard to lift. What relevance his big brother missing a tackle I don't know

Often folk talk about "the unseen graft" that players do - Jonny is the master of this. Tidies up loose ball, trucks up poor ball to set it up again. Lovely hands for passing. Remeber also its harder to stand out when you are being beaten.

As for roles - its all about combinations and how players work together. Jonny is the glue that holds the team together his absence against ireland was really noticeable.- Cotter has the tactics and roles to suit the players we have. He is not a lineout jumper

Kruis missed more tackles in that one game than Jonny has in two seasons

Jonny is involved in every aspect of the game - making passes, odd lineout steals, lifting in the lineout, defensivly impregnable, calls the lineout, great leadership, clearing rucks, making turnovers. I have never seen a player so involved, who works so hard and who has such a fantastic engine.

This is a player who if he remains fit at the end of his career will be considered alongside greats like MJ. In seasons to come I am sure you will all see this.

mikey_dragon wrote:

TJ wrote:
Indeed there are - but that wasn't the point - Mickey said.
He said "So where is the accusations of a pathetic English desire to belittle everything/everyone else? These accusations only come out against the Welsh, just like it's apparently only the welsh who comment negatively on referees." so I challenged him to find a post where any scots fan has said these things - you won't find one as it doesn't happen

Tattie said it about the Welsh - it's quoted. I challenged this and got complained about. This is me pointing out facts when you call me out, I'm not bickering.

Please quote it again - I cannot find this post. BTW I saw absolutly nothing to complain about to the mods - maybe I just missed this exchange but plese post it again.

beshocked wrote:fa0019 agree about Richie. With his size and attributes he should be a excellent player. I still believe that if Sarries signed him instead of Sale 4-5 years ago, Sarries would have turned him into a much better player. Was a fool to go to Sale in my opinion.


2nd row is a very competitive area with the likes of Charteris,AWJ,Launchbury,Lawes,J.Gray,Itoje and Kruis potentially all in the mix. Could be another bolter or two too.

Ritchie is an interesting case. I think he is actually dyspraxic ( clumsy kid syndrome) - ie he has some co ordination issues which is why his running style is so awkward looking. He is a competent player but does not seem to have progressed as he should have done

beshocked wrote:fa0019 agree about Richie. With his size and attributes he should be a excellent player. I still believe that if Sarries signed him instead of Sale 4-5 years ago, Sarries would have turned him into a much better player. Was a fool to go to Sale in my opinion.


2nd row is a very competitive area with the likes of Charteris,AWJ,Launchbury,Lawes,J.Gray,Itoje and Kruis potentially all in the mix. Could be another bolter or two too.

Too heavy for me and not smart at all in the lineout... maybe because he's too heavy. He's a 4 but Jones is better, Itoje is better in the loose and better in the lineout.

I'd say at the moment

Charteris
AWJ
Kruis
Itoje

maybe Launchbury, maybe J Gray, maybe Toner... I mean he's a real nuisance which comes in handy.

TJ wrote:

beshocked wrote:fa0019 agree about Richie. With his size and attributes he should be a excellent player. I still believe that if Sarries signed him instead of Sale 4-5 years ago, Sarries would have turned him into a much better player. Was a fool to go to Sale in my opinion.


2nd row is a very competitive area with the likes of Charteris,AWJ,Launchbury,Lawes,J.Gray,Itoje and Kruis potentially all in the mix. Could be another bolter or two too.

Ritchie is an interesting case.  I think he is actually dyspraxic ( clumsy kid syndrome) - ie he has some co ordination issues which is why his running style is so awkward looking.  He is a competent player but does not seem to have progressed as he should have done

He could lose 10kg and be still as powerful but maybe a genuine threat in the lineout. For all his worth bakkies botha never was heavier than 118kg.

Can you ever disguise lifting a 130kg gray?

TJ wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

TJ wrote:
Indeed there are - but that wasn't the point - Mickey said.
He said "So where is the accusations of a pathetic English desire to belittle everything/everyone else? These accusations only come out against the Welsh, just like it's apparently only the welsh who comment negatively on referees." so I challenged him to find a post where any scots fan has said these things - you won't find one as it doesn't happen

Tattie said it about the Welsh - it's quoted. I challenged this and got complained about. This is me pointing out facts when you call me out, I'm not bickering.

Please quote it again - I cannot find this post.  BTW I saw absolutly nothing to complain about to the mods - maybe I just missed this exchange but plese post it again.

It's not hard to see it:

Tattie Scones RRN wrote:
I really don't understand this pathetic Welsh desire to belittle everything/everyone else. Please - you're more than welcome to scrap for every tiny little excuse for losing, or other team's winning, but results stand.

That was in reply to Fanster talking about Scotland's wins, and I thought he made some okay comments. My later response to beshocked was a harmless and sarcastic reference to Tattie's comment here. Anyway it was almost 2 hours ago now so I'll move on.

* My reply to that quote was complained about, and there was nothing that really warranted a complaint. I'm assuming the mods agree.

TJ  fair enough if that's how you feel but I am sure many others thought that Kruis was the best 2nd row in the 6 nations.

No missed tackles seems to a big deal for you. Fair enough I guess. Everyone has their opinions. If that's what you want from a player.

A lifter? A 6,6 bloke is a lifter.... seems a waste. Why doesn't Cotter use both Gray bros as jumpers?

"Unseen" graft can be a bit hyped up though - he's world class because he does things no one sees etc...

Would rather a player is visibly making a difference than sitting in the shadows.

You say you've never seen a 2nd row so involved - you obviously missed Kruis' performances in the 6 nations and Itoje's performance notably vs Wales.

Don't get me wrong I think J.Gray was good - but not the standout lock in the 6 nations. I wouldn't say he was the most influential scotsman either.

Disagree, players can stand out when beaten, Parisse does it most of the time for Italy. He shines because he's a class apart.

beshocked wrote:TJ  fair enough if that's how you feel but I am sure many others thought that Kruis was the best 2nd row in the 6 nations.

No missed tackles seems to a big deal for you. Fair enough I guess. Everyone has their opinions. If that's what you want from a player.

A lifter? A 6,6 bloke is a lifter.... seems a waste. Why doesn't Cotter use both Gray bros as jumpers?

"Unseen" graft can be a bit hyped up though - he's world class because he does things no one sees etc...

Would rather a player is visibly making a difference than sitting in the shadows.

You say you've never seen a 2nd row so involved - you obviously missed Kruis' performances in the 6 nations and Itoje's performance notably vs Wales.

Don't get me wrong I think J.Gray was good - but not the standout lock in the 6 nations. I wouldn't say he was the most influential scotsman either.

Disagree, players can stand out when beaten, Parisse does it most of the time for Italy. He shines because he's a class apart.

Matfield is the best pro 5 in rugby history... outside of the lineout he did a job, that's it. A 5, a lineout leader is judged purely on their completion rate... I recall Gray messing up a few calls especially vs. Wales.

Sorry but for me that doesn't cut the mustard. I think much of the blame can be laid to Ford's shoulders as a hooker but still, gray doesn't run a smooth lineout. The only one who does really is Kruis at the moment and because of that he's worth his weight in gold.. well a good lineout captain who can call any play not just a safe but restricted front jumper and a good hooker such as Hartley.

I think one thing this discussion has shown is that lions selection is difficult and some positions - lock especially are going to be very hard with a whole bunch of very good players who have slightly different attributes.  
As an example with J Gray in the side you can play two 7s - his defensive abilities free up room for another person to concentrate on turnovers.  But if you play Billy V at 8 then you can't really play two 7s 'cos you need that extra tackler- so if you play Billy V maybe you can't play Gray and vice versa.

The playing style the coach wants to play and the combinations that gel together might really be the deciding factor in the choice between these players of similar class but different strengths

beshocked wrote:A lifter? A 6,6 bloke is a lifter.... seems a waste. Why doesn't Cotter use both Gray bros as jumpers?

 cos thats the style that suits the players we have and the way Cotter likes to play.  Scotland often use backrow as jumpers.  Scotlands maul defense was poor so on opposition throw we want JG on the ground to defend the maul?  JG is not much used as  lineout jumper for Glasgow either again back rows are often thrown into the air by the big guys.  Personally I would rather Scotland attacked lineouts more - but I ain't the coach

No 7&1/2 wrote:Rubbish. Why would you judge players on a teams win loss ratio? For me there would be 4 in definite contention for starts: Nel, J Gray, Hardie and Hogg.

This is the only post in the last page or so that was not on my ignore list

I agree all four would be in contention based on current form, but much depends on who the Head Coach is.

beshocked wrote:Fanster not sure I agree with FB, I thought the FBs in the 6 nations were a bit mediocre except for Hogg who was IMO a class apart in that position.

As for Barclay, I personally feel he's got a lot to do to be considered, you are welcome to disagree.

2,4 and 5 should be very competitive but I think in the 6 nations - England had the edge in those positions, noticeably disrupting the Irish and Welsh lineouts, strong lineout figures bar vs Italy where they had a wobble.

I criticised Hartley even during the tournament but on reflection he was a safe pair of hands generally. Set piece wise I thought he was generally solid. It's not easy for me to give credit as I went on a long rant about his discipline before the tournament. I've had to back track.

Webb-Sexton might work but we don't know. Sexton might not even be first choice 10, Farrell or Biggar might leapfrog ahead.

I am not say go there with a 3-0 mentality but the Lions need a strong foundation based on good basics and good decision making.

The Lions need to find the right blend between being pragmatic and a bit of spark. Go for style over substance and the Lions will struggle.


mikey dragon the poor SH record for Gatland is a valid criticism, just as England struggling to beat SA is something that England have to address, just as England's inability to win a GS since 2003 had to be addressed - a win now in 2016 goes some way to putting this right.

It's nothing personal against Wales, every national side has things they can work on.

Personally I think the Scots players aren't as good as the Scots think they are. I believe that the Scottish players are benefiting from a superior coach like Cotter.

It's been shown for England that a superior management can make a difference with similar players.

As this is the only comment worthy of replying to (there are a lot of emotional issues amongst others)...

With regards to FB, Hogg was a very very exciting attacking player, as a rounded FB he was probably 2nd, possibly 3rd, behind Brown and Williams. With Halfpenny to return also there is plenty at 15 to choose from, Hogg will have a scrap on his hands.

Barclay has been ignored for 2 seasons, he's currently playing 6/7/8 for Scarlets and has become integral to Scottish plans, Hardie is too lightweight IMO.

With regards to 4 and 5, there are tons of locks around right now, it will be a matter of form next 6N.

2 however, well there is a severe lack of options around. Best is probably the highest quality but has been struggling this year, Hartley showed nothing but lineout throwing, he used to be a savage who gave away penalties, now he trundles around doing the basics without anything extra, and most of the time I forgot he was on the field. Baldwin, Ford are both poor options.

I agree some Scottish players are overhyped, but there are some underhyped, Dunbar and Barclay for example. Lets not pretend also Scotlands form has picked up, Italy and France have capitulated in recent years and are easily the worst 2 teams around, both will pick off the odd win or 2 in the next few seasons IMO. Scotland have managed to keep their heads above water where these 2 teams have fallen apart.

Quite right TJ, whoever is picked may play a slightly different game from their usual (ignoring the Gatlan effect), Vunipola is one of those who regularly featured in the high tackling stakes prior to this 6Ns for example.

You must have culled a few LT! Yeah form and of course the type of player Gatland wants may come into it (probably the latter rather than former).

Right - at the risk of really showing myself up I shall pick a team.  Its only players who played in this 6N not those injured or out of form so no 1/2p / Bennett etc.  When I rule the world coach the team all rugby players should be mavericks.  I prefer the two moments of brilliance and one mistake ( hoping its not the other way round) to the steady eddies of the game.  I am going to go for speed, for contesting the breakdown and for mercurial players where possible.  I want the game to be unpredictable, open and mixed up.  As expected a touch of Scots bias


1. Marler - close call but I like a bit of abrasion from my props.  Needs to scrum straight tho or he gets pulled!
2. Hartley no standouts here - his lineout throwing gets him the place
3. Nel - who else!
4. J. Gray - I have argued enough for him  
5.  Kruis - everyone rates what he did this year
6. Hardie - I am starting with 2 7s to attack the ball.  
7. Warburton
8. Faletau - I want an all round 8
9. Webb - close call but as I want Biggar he gets the call
10. Biggar - his kick chase game gained a huge amount of territory, has the ability to get the ball to the backs outside him and doesn't make mistakes
11. Seymour for the kickchase and his unpredictability
12. Dunbar need some bulk and power in the backs and his breakdown work is great - only just squeaks in as he was coming back into form
13. Joseph - just a great running threat
14. Watson speed speed and more speed
15. Hogg - nothing else will do

16. McGrath not really sure about the bench front row
17. MacInally
18. Lee
19. AJW unlucky to miss out
20. B Vunipola - impact Sub at 8.  I want to see him running at tiring players
21. Care - gets the nod for his abrasiveness  I considered Laidlaw as a "closer"
22. Sexton
23. Brown - gets the nod for a bit of versatility and defensive soldity

Captain?  I'd go for Gray but you would all laugh - so its Hartley.

Probably some laughable blunders in there.  

forwards
I am going for a solid front row, The workrate and defensive solidity of Gray allowing the luxury of 2 sevens, Kruis for his lineout work and and pace and Falatau brings back some balance with his allround game. BIlly V to come on at 55 mins to ask different questions and to run at tiring forwards.  AJW on the bench for his experience and unlucky to miss out

Backs

I wanted Biggar - in the form of his life and his kick and catch is something I have never seen another 10 do and gained a huge amount of territory - and Sexton was not at his best.  Having selected Biggar and with no real standout 9s Webb gets the nod.  The rest I went for speed and unpredictability with Dunbar just showing enough form to be selected as I want somone with power in the backs.  His breakdown work is tremendous.  I want the backs to run round folk not thru them and I want mavericks

I wanted to find a place for Russell but in the end his mistakes could be too expensive despite his unrivalled ability to cut defences open and we might need a steady player to come on and close the game so Sexton gets it.

Worries?  Back row balance and lightweight ( but NZ not the biggest), no centre on the bench but if one is injured maybe Seymour could fill in.  Or perhaps you could argue North should have had Seymours place - he is in good form and can play centre

Go on then chaps - tear me to pieces.  this is a selection to ply the tactics I want.  All out attack, mix it up, go for breakdown turnovers, attack their lineout, push their scrum around, the ability to play territory when needed and a lot of counter-attacking ability should they ( as NZ often do) do a lot of kicking

Surprised about Marler TJ. Not a fan, not the gypsygate thing but for me he has too much front, too much chat for a prop that at best holds his own.  No standout too be fair but McGrath was impressive.

That would be my backrow at the moment though.

Like the idea of Seymour but over North?

Could a trio of North, Seymour and Watson work... very threatening ball in hand but can they control territory vs. NZ? Maybe why people like Brown. I'm a fan of Williams too for the 15 berth.

TJ

Admirable attempt, I was disagreeing with you as scrolling down, but when I got to the back 3 I nearly wet myself laughing (no offence). The thought of Seymour and Hogg colliding for NZ to walk in a score fills me with dread, and none of your back 3 have a defencive game. Who is there to cover tackles outside Dunbar (Who isn't the best defencive 12, and would prefer an intercept to a collision)?

Any team without North has a serious issue IMO.

Marler < Mcgrath
Hartley < Best
Nel = Lee = Cole
J Gray = AWJ > Itoje
Kruis > Charteris
Hardie at 6? Over SOB, Stander, Lydiate, Haskell, Robshaw... Your deluded.
Warburton = SOB = Barclay
Vunipola = Falatau (Really depends on your ethos on how to beat NZ)
Webb = Murray (I'd like to see Webb with Sexton)
Biggar = Sexton > Farell
North
Dunbar = Roberts (His form on return was good, but it was France so...)
Joseph is a poor option at 13, JD2 = Taylor better options.
Watson = Seymour = Williams (I'd go with Hogg here though)
Brown = Williams (Halfpenny will return too)

I'd go with current form...

Mcgrath
Best
Cole
Gray
Kruis
Stander
Warburton
Falatau
Webb
Sexton
North
Roberts
Taylor
Hogg
Brown

Evans
Hartley
Lee
AWJ
Robshaw
Murray
Farell
Williams

I'd have North over Seymour personally. For the 1st test at least.

North is a player I have never really rated but hard to pin down why. I think he drifts in and out of games a bit and his defense but he was right at his best this year making a lot of metres and coming off his wing looking for work which I do like. I really rate Seymour tho. I really want a specialist FB - you thinking Seymour at FB?

Warburton will play 7 and be skipper if Gatland coaches.

Thing is though is he not a 6.5 just as much as Haskell and Robshaw are?

Finally 6 Scots in the starting XV does appear to show some inherent bias.

My selection is a team based on speed and attack - no I ain't deluded about Hardie - he is there for his positive qualities that fit the game plan I want - very quick and destructive but I accept that if you view different qualities as more important then your choice may differ. if yo are second to the breakdown you don't get turnovers is my

I don't want to put players out of position - hence Hogg only gets in at FB - he was the player of the 6N after all. He is not as poor defensivly as some think and "that" mistake - was it not more seymours fault?

Joesph for his great elusive running - I will admit to forgetting JD2 but was he in form this 6N? I don't remember him doing anything but I am getting old and forgetful

The backs are picked to score tries by the bucketload. Not to be a defensive wall. Sorry Roberts is too one dimensional for the way I want them to play ( running round the man, creating space by moving the ball) but I agree he looked in good form and if you want a different style of play he could be your man. Dunbar is defensively very good - we didn't see the best of him this year and he only just squeaked in my team

NOrth is a real conundrum to me - I just don't rate him but can't explain why and do recognise he was in good form this year.. I did say in the post tho that maybe he should be in for Seymour

No 7&1/2 wrote:Rubbish. Why would you judge players on a teams win loss ratio? For me there would be 4 in definite contention for starts: Nel, J Gray, Hardie and Hogg.

FFS, here we go with the Nel show again. When he can last for more than one half then he might be considered.

LondonTiger wrote:

Finally 6 Scots in the starting XV does appear to show some inherent bias.

TJ wrote: As expected a touch of Scots bias Smile

     

Ok - North instead of Seymour although I might argue for Nowell  Hartley can be captain so long as he is quiet when Gray speaks

Centres - to me no one really sparkled in the style I want. So argue me a centre who is good defensivly, good passer, reasonably quick, creative. North at 12? or is that even more daft. I really want Joeseph - I love his running style and his elusiveness. I wanted to put Peter Horne in there but knew that would be laughed off the board but he is a lovely elusive runner.

Oh - and maybe Lamont on the bench - remeber (he claims) to be the fastest player in the scotland squad

to be fair, Joseph was defensively very solid indeed throughout the 6N, though didn't offer as much in attack as the previous year. I worry about a lack of strong carriers in the pack though from your team TJ, the front 7 don't offer any more carrying than England in the 6N did, and Vunipola was used as England's main carrier (sometimes the only one). I don't mind the front 7 you've gone with, but would need to pick a big carrier at 8 to complement that, which Faletau isn't. If you really want Vunipola for impact, maybe Stander is an option there? No point having an exciting attacking backline if they're always playing behind the baseline.

fa0019 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:I will eat my hat if any Scottish players start a test fot the Lions next summer, there might be one on the bench, Hogg, but that is it, there are far suppirior players from England,Ireland and Wales in every position.

Even Hogg would not be a cert.

In certain positions its easy to look good when you have other players around you giving you an armchair. Some feed off scraps and still shine, maybe not as much as  those with the  best around them but that doesn't necessarily mean they are better players.

WTF. Look, when Scotland start winning more than one or two games in the 6N on a regular basis then we can start considering them for the Lions.

In 1997 England were the top home nations side by far. In the 5N they beat Wales by 21 points, Scotland by 28 and Ireland by 40. Yet they only fielded 6 players compared to 9 from the 3 other nations in the first test and it would have been 5 and 10 had Howley been fit. Maybe even 4 and 11 if Quinnell wasn't injured either.

You can say the same about the 2001 tour too.

A good bunch of that dominant England side didn't even make the tour.

I remember that 1997 tour, John Bentley, Matt Dawson, Martin Johnson, Lawrence Dalaglio, Guscott, Neil Back, they were all starters, so that is half the first team full of English players, there might have been more, I just cannot be bothered to check. So that blows your theory out if the water.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:..............I worry about a lack of strong carriers in the pack though from your team TJ, the front 7 don't offer any more carrying than England in the 6N did, and Vunipola was used as England's main carrier (sometimes the only one). I don't mind the front 7 you've gone with, but would need to pick a big carrier at 8 to complement that, which Faletau isn't. If you really want Vunipola for impact, maybe Stander is an option there? No point having an exciting attacking backline if they're always playing behind the baseline.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm - maybe.  I thought folk were rating Kruis carrying.  good point tho.  Gray carries a lot and makes the hard yards but didn't get much penetration this year - certainly nothing like Billy V.  Hartly didn't arry much either did he and Nel drops the ball too much.  

Its tricky this selection lark ain't it. Maybe I shouldn't have accepted the post but who could turn down such an honour?

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Rubbish. Why would you judge players on a teams win loss ratio? For me there would be 4 in definite contention for starts: Nel, J Gray, Hardie and Hogg.

FFS, here we go with the Nel show again. When he can last for more than one half then he might be considered.

He played almost all of every game and does so for Glasgow as well. Yes that was a criticism of him when he arrived but not so now

TJ wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Rubbish. Why would you judge players on a teams win loss ratio? For me there would be 4 in definite contention for starts: Nel, J Gray, Hardie and Hogg.

FFS, here we go with the Nel show again. When he can last for more than one half then he might be considered.

He played almost all of every game and does so for Glasgow as well.  Yes that was a criticism of him when he arrived but not so now

TJ, this is New Zealand we are talking about, not Zebre or Dragons. Yes he has the ability, but as the game wares on, you can see that he struggles. Also, there are better players than him available anyway.

LordDowlais wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

In 1997 England were the top home nations side by far. In the 5N they beat Wales by 21 points, Scotland by 28 and Ireland by 40. Yet they only fielded 6 players compared to 9 from the 3 other nations in the first test and it would have been 5 and 10 had Howley been fit. Maybe even 4 and 11 if Quinnell wasn't injured either.

You can say the same about the 2001 tour too.

A good bunch of that dominant England side didn't even make the tour.

I remember that 1997 tour, John Bentley, Matt Dawson, Martin Johnson, Lawrence Dalaglio, Guscott, Neil Back, they were all starters, so that is half the first team full of English players, there might have been more, I just cannot be bothered to check. So that blows your theory out if the water.

He does say that 6 English players were in the first test - so no theory blown out of the water surely? Those 6 did not include Bentley or Back - but instead Hill and Rodber. It is pretty fair to say though that but for injury Howley would have replaced Dawson and Quinnell one of the English back rowers.

Ieuan Evans was injured bythe second test so Bentley came in, who remember had not featured for England in over 9 years.

By the 3rd test Underwood (t), Catt and Back were starting to take the England contingent to 8 - and they got hammered.

Cannot agree with fa about the selection of the 2001 squad - 20 English players on that tour (the same number that SCW originally selected in 2005)

LD - He is the best TH in the 6N in most folks opinions- really who do you think better? I think most props struggle later in Games and he has been worked into the ground this year ( For Edinburgh not Glasgow as I said BTW). replace him at 55 mins?

LD - put up your team to be shot down then? ONly guys who played and were in form this year

He's taking the pi$$ TJ.

Nel is interesting, he reminds me a bit of Thomas the tank, does what he does, but doesn't get enough credit because he doesn't look the part.

At the minute I think Lee, Nel, and Cole are all of a muchness, however Cole has travelled before and is far more experienced an option.

While I was working out my team the bench gave me real headaches. 6/2 split or 5/3? I went for 5 /3 but you need a full front row usually so what other subs do you have - a lock and a back row, a scrum half, a standoff and a back 3 player? or a lock, two back row a scrum half and a utility back?

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Rubbish. Why would you judge players on a teams win loss ratio? For me there would be 4 in definite contention for starts: Nel, J Gray, Hardie and Hogg.

FFS, here we go with the Nel show again. When he can last for more than one half then he might be considered.

Just consider him a good player. Given that the front row rarely make it throught the game anyway not too bothered by your reasoning but its better than the fact you wouldn't pick him because he plays for Scotland!

Ah, but is he Scottish?

You notice I danced around that!

LondonTiger wrote:Ah, but is he Scottish?

Of course he is. What could be more scottish than to be called Willem Petrus Nel with a nickname of Veepee

TJ wrote:I think one thing this discussion has shown is that lions selection is difficult and some positions - lock especially are going to be very hard with a whole bunch of very good players who have slightly different attributes.  
As an example with J Gray in the side you can play two 7s - his defensive abilities free up room for another person to concentrate on turnovers.  But if you play Billy V at 8 then you can't really play two 7s 'cos you need that extra tackler- so if you play Billy V maybe you can't play Gray and vice versa.

No you can't. Not unless you have a no.8 who is a good lineout guy. Grey the younger does have a great chance to go but just to repeat yet again what has been said,
1) his tackling stats are hugely impressive but that isn't a lock's primary role.
2) England-Scotland Kruis made a difference. Grey (either of them) did not.

LondonTiger wrote:Ah, but is he Scottish?

Of course he is - he is already being fitted for his Scottish Rugby title

McNel

:-)

lostinwales wrote:

TJ wrote:I think one thing this discussion has shown is that lions selection is difficult and some positions - lock especially are going to be very hard with a whole bunch of very good players who have slightly different attributes.  
As an example with J Gray in the side you can play two 7s - his defensive abilities free up room for another person to concentrate on turnovers.  But if you play Billy V at 8 then you can't really play two 7s 'cos you need that extra tackler- so if you play Billy V maybe you can't play Gray and vice versa.

No you can't. Not unless you have a no.8 who is a good lineout guy. Grey the younger does have a great chance to go but just to repeat yet again what has been said,
1) his tackling stats are hugely impressive but that isn't a lock's primary role.
2) England-Scotland Kruis made a difference. Grey (either of them) did not.

I think there is a little bit too much - my dad is taller that your dad here

Gray was very impressive in almost everything

Kruis was very impressive in almost everything

They both have different skill sets - but both are very good 2nd rows

They both could / should tour - but entirely depends on the tactics and who else is picked

Both did themselves great favours in the 6 nations as both were on form


Can we just leave it at that

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Rubbish. Why would you judge players on a teams win loss ratio? For me there would be 4 in definite contention for starts: Nel, J Gray, Hardie and Hogg.

FFS, here we go with the Nel show again. When he can last for more than one half then he might be considered.

Except for straight after international duty, you'll often see Nel being played for the whole 80 mins at Edinburgh! It was one of our biggest criticisms of Alan Solomons that he doesn't sub or even rotate Nel very often at all! Might explain why Nel often has more tries to his name than some Pro 12 wingers!

Riskysports wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

TJ wrote:I think one thing this discussion has shown is that lions selection is difficult and some positions - lock especially are going to be very hard with a whole bunch of very good players who have slightly different attributes.  
As an example with J Gray in the side you can play two 7s - his defensive abilities free up room for another person to concentrate on turnovers.  But if you play Billy V at 8 then you can't really play two 7s 'cos you need that extra tackler- so if you play Billy V maybe you can't play Gray and vice versa.

No you can't. Not unless you have a no.8 who is a good lineout guy. Grey the younger does have a great chance to go but just to repeat yet again what has been said,
1) his tackling stats are hugely impressive but that isn't a lock's primary role.
2) England-Scotland Kruis made a difference. Grey (either of them) did not.

I think there is a little bit too much - my dad is taller that your dad here

Gray was very impressive in almost everything

Kruis was very impressive in almost everything

They both have different skill sets - but both are very good 2nd rows

They both could / should tour - but entirely depends on the tactics and who else is picked

Both did themselves great favours in the 6 nations as both were on form


Can we just leave it at that

Seems fair enough.

I have nothing against Scotland or the Scottish people, I just do not think that the current Scottish players are as good as their Irish, Welsh or English counterparts, if they were, they would have beaten Wales in the last 9yrs or England and Ireland within the past few years.

The thing is they haven't, if they had all theses better front rowers, second rowers, and flankers you would have thought they would have had a few wins under their belts and finished higher than 4th in the 6N in the last few years, but the fact is, they haven't.