British & Irish Lions Squad 2017

First topic message reminder :

Fairly simple, champions cup aside, we have nearly all the information Garland will have to pick the Lions squad, so go ahead name your squad, your captain etc.

George, Teo, Vunipola, Sinckler and Nowell arent even first choices for England.
In teh case of the first two those ahead of them arent being sleected ...if this rumoured list is correct then that really says a lot about Gatlands "I know better" ego.
Kruis too a huge gamble given how long hes been out.

The inclussion of Roberts would just be plain embaressing for all involved. JJ is the outstanding attacking center in NH rugby. Guys like Ford and Russel and Dunbar I can understand being left at home if theres questions about their tackling, but JJ is no pansy.

In terms of the Scotts ..its perhaps the English (and EARLS???) more than the Welsh that are keeping them out. Not a single back you can see as truely controversial to leave out despite their collective brilliance (in attack) but it does stink that collectively they arent going. Probably more controversial would be the forwards and no Grey brother. Yes lock is hugely competitive but thats where you can see a genuine all round star being left at home.


All in the make up of the backs signals a negative view that they need to challenge physicaly in attack and ddefence rather than take NZ on for pace and skill. They may still look to play with a bit more flair than the standard Wales playbook but the players listed arent the best to do that.


NZ will be very happy to see this squad pitch up if it is correct.

Russell would be a disaster IMO, can see the logic of Biggar.

hugehandoff wrote:Roberts, Halfpenny and Biggar are bad calls. Roberts is too slow now and he and J.Davies were exposed last summer in NZ. Halfpenny has shown no form and should not be picked. Sexton and Farrell have the goal kicking covered and even Hogg does a good job there. Biggar is very brave and great at catching his own kicks, but offers no attacking threat and does not make use of his backs. Finn Russell is the more obvious choice. Just shows that coaches will revert to players they know well. Like Woodward, Gatland, is ignoring the obvious evidence called current and recent form.

But the test side will be strong and I will support, but for now I am feeling flat.

A very good point - most Scots are realistic that Hogg is the only one likely to have a real change of a test shirt, so we weren't expecting many Scots to get test caps. This is the British and Irish Lions though for feck sake and if there is only 1 (or 2 if we're lucky) then the whole Scotish nation will feel utterly alienated from it.

Donnacha Ryan, Earls etc are not going to be test players - would it really have made any difference whatsoever to pick a Gray and Seymour instead, thus taking away the inevitable headlines and backlash that will follow if it is true that only 1 or 2 Scots will be picked?

RDW_Scotland wrote:

hugehandoff wrote:Roberts, Halfpenny and Biggar are bad calls. Roberts is too slow now and he and J.Davies were exposed last summer in NZ. Halfpenny has shown no form and should not be picked. Sexton and Farrell have the goal kicking covered and even Hogg does a good job there. Biggar is very brave and great at catching his own kicks, but offers no attacking threat and does not make use of his backs. Finn Russell is the more obvious choice. Just shows that coaches will revert to players they know well. Like Woodward, Gatland, is ignoring the obvious evidence called current and recent form.

But the test side will be strong and I will support, but for now I am feeling flat.

A very good point - most Scots are realistic that Hogg is the only one likely to have a real change of a test shirt, so we weren't expecting many Scots to get test caps.  This is the British and Irish Lions though for feck sake and if there is only 1 (or 2 if we're lucky) then the whole Scotish nation will feel utterly alienated from it.

Donnacha Ryan, Earls etc are not going to be test players - would it really have made any difference whatsoever to pick a Gray and Seymour instead, thus taking away the inevitable headlines and backlash that will follow if it is true that only 1 or 2 Scots will be picked?

Why will they? Why do Scots treat the British and Irish Lions simply as an extension of Scotland? Do you only support the Scots at the olympics?

Why have you drawn that line there? When Scotland play are you only interested if there is decent representation for the club that you support?

I'm interested to know how the squad has been leaked, I thought not even the players knew until the announcement? The captain found out who he was last night, but the rest of the squad are in the dark?

Do anyone over and above the coaches know? How do the telegraph know?

Lions captain in tag.

Spoiler:

Thought he was injured?

kingelderfield wrote:So which games won't they lose?

Blues are proving adept at losing games in the last 20 mins this season. Highlanders, Hurricanes and Chiefs will be sans All Blacks, and the NZ Barbarians are mostly semi-pro players, so about as good as Dragons/Edinburgh/Bristol.



On the plus side, you can get 7/2 at most UK bookmakers on a Lions series win. Or 10/11 on a 3-0 Blackwash (a Lions 3-0 sweep is paying 33/1)

cascough wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:

hugehandoff wrote:Roberts, Halfpenny and Biggar are bad calls. Roberts is too slow now and he and J.Davies were exposed last summer in NZ. Halfpenny has shown no form and should not be picked. Sexton and Farrell have the goal kicking covered and even Hogg does a good job there. Biggar is very brave and great at catching his own kicks, but offers no attacking threat and does not make use of his backs. Finn Russell is the more obvious choice. Just shows that coaches will revert to players they know well. Like Woodward, Gatland, is ignoring the obvious evidence called current and recent form.

But the test side will be strong and I will support, but for now I am feeling flat.

A very good point - most Scots are realistic that Hogg is the only one likely to have a real change of a test shirt, so we weren't expecting many Scots to get test caps.  This is the British and Irish Lions though for feck sake and if there is only 1 (or 2 if we're lucky) then the whole Scotish nation will feel utterly alienated from it.

Donnacha Ryan, Earls etc are not going to be test players - would it really have made any difference whatsoever to pick a Gray and Seymour instead, thus taking away the inevitable headlines and backlash that will follow if it is true that only 1 or 2 Scots will be picked?

Why will they? Why do Scots treat the British and Irish Lions simply as an extension of Scotland? Do you only support the Scots at the olympics?

Why have you drawn that line there? When Scotland play are you only interested if there is decent representation for the club that you support?

You'll notice that I said that we'll feel alienated from it, not that we'll not support the team because there's a lack of Scots - that is a big difference and surely an understandable response. Given that the last time we had more than 4 players selected was in 1997 perhaps try to understand where we are coming from.

I don't think you can compare Olympics with rugby as the vast majority of the sports are essentially individuals representing themselves first and foremost, plus it's not as if 'Team Scotland' is a regular occurrence throughout the sporting year in Olympic sports, as opposed to the Scotland National Team who player 16 or so tests a year.

Scottrf wrote:Russell would be a disaster IMO, can see the logic of Biggar.

Yeah as with Ford theres legitimate reasons for him to be left out.
Absolutely the same with Visser whos an extreme defensive liability.

Its more the collective failure of Scotts to make the squad when their sides the strongest as a unit its been for decades that makes the lack of players making the cut stand out.

Its hard to square how only one scottish back could make be selected if the likes of Earls, Teo, Nowell and Roberts go. Webb and Biggar are hardly stand out players either.

cascough wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:

hugehandoff wrote:Roberts, Halfpenny and Biggar are bad calls. Roberts is too slow now and he and J.Davies were exposed last summer in NZ. Halfpenny has shown no form and should not be picked. Sexton and Farrell have the goal kicking covered and even Hogg does a good job there. Biggar is very brave and great at catching his own kicks, but offers no attacking threat and does not make use of his backs. Finn Russell is the more obvious choice. Just shows that coaches will revert to players they know well. Like Woodward, Gatland, is ignoring the obvious evidence called current and recent form.

But the test side will be strong and I will support, but for now I am feeling flat.

A very good point - most Scots are realistic that Hogg is the only one likely to have a real change of a test shirt, so we weren't expecting many Scots to get test caps.  This is the British and Irish Lions though for feck sake and if there is only 1 (or 2 if we're lucky) then the whole Scotish nation will feel utterly alienated from it.

Donnacha Ryan, Earls etc are not going to be test players - would it really have made any difference whatsoever to pick a Gray and Seymour instead, thus taking away the inevitable headlines and backlash that will follow if it is true that only 1 or 2 Scots will be picked?

Why will they? Why do Scots treat the British and Irish Lions simply as an extension of Scotland? Do you only support the Scots at the olympics?

Why have you drawn that line there? When Scotland play are you only interested if there is decent representation for the club that you support?

In 2009 / 2013 I was disappointed that there weren't more England players good enough to break into the squad, but to be fair we hadn't won a Championship for 6 years / had won 1 Championship in 10 years when those tours came about and there were obviously better players about.

I'd say Scotland in those years were the same, they just didn't have good enough players, and that would be disappointing in it's own right, but shouldn't dampen your support because the best team had been picked.

This is different though. Although I want the Lions coach to pick his squad based on who he thinks equipped to beat the hosts and not who they play for, Scotland do have some players who are seen by many as the better options, and I'd say 1 in 40 is a bit of a travesty.

J Gray, Watson, Russell, Dunbar and Seymour should have all featured heavily in selection discussions. R Gray, Barclay and Laidlaw should have been mentioned. That none of them made it is a real shock.

cascough wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:

hugehandoff wrote:Roberts, Halfpenny and Biggar are bad calls. Roberts is too slow now and he and J.Davies were exposed last summer in NZ. Halfpenny has shown no form and should not be picked. Sexton and Farrell have the goal kicking covered and even Hogg does a good job there. Biggar is very brave and great at catching his own kicks, but offers no attacking threat and does not make use of his backs. Finn Russell is the more obvious choice. Just shows that coaches will revert to players they know well. Like Woodward, Gatland, is ignoring the obvious evidence called current and recent form.

But the test side will be strong and I will support, but for now I am feeling flat.

A very good point - most Scots are realistic that Hogg is the only one likely to have a real change of a test shirt, so we weren't expecting many Scots to get test caps.  This is the British and Irish Lions though for feck sake and if there is only 1 (or 2 if we're lucky) then the whole Scotish nation will feel utterly alienated from it.

Donnacha Ryan, Earls etc are not going to be test players - would it really have made any difference whatsoever to pick a Gray and Seymour instead, thus taking away the inevitable headlines and backlash that will follow if it is true that only 1 or 2 Scots will be picked?

Why will they? Why do Scots treat the British and Irish Lions simply as an extension of Scotland? Do you only support the Scots at the olympics?

Why have you drawn that line there? When Scotland play are you only interested if there is decent representation for the club that you support?

That is completely different. The olympics is ALWAYS based on form. Hence why there are qualifiers to see who is the best and worthy of representing the UK.

If Scotland only have one Lions tourist I seriously think Hogg (if it is him) should tell Gatland to get stuffed off and take Mike Brown instead, because it smacks of tokenism in the highest order.

Has Earls really done more than Seymour or Maitland? I'm trying to stay positive but it's hard. For years we haven't played well and been underrepresented. Now we are playing well having beaten Ireland and Wales (2 of the other Lions pool nations) and face the prospect of having 1 tourist?

Furthermore, Warburton was dropped as captain of Wales due to pressure, but is now deemed mentally fit enough to captain the Lions against New Zealand?

One Scottish tourist would be an utter disgrace. Especially since Gatland was in the stands at Murrayfield when Wales and Ireland were dismantled by Scotland.

So has Te'o, Davies etc really done more than JJ? Has Kruis, AWJ et al really done more than Launchbury? Why is it all about the Scottish exclusions for you?

You want to take issue with the his implied gameplan? I understand that. You want to question whether there are players are in better form? I understand that too. But to reduce it to something so basic as, there aren't many Scots, this is an outrage, then I struggle to understand the mindset with which you (and apparently an entire nation) approach the Lions.

I'd have taken Maitland over Earls, personally. Plus I also think he would fit Gatlands gameplan better. But Maitland does not get extra entitlement to go just because he's scottish and we need to get the numbers up. Gatland has gone in a different direction. I don't agree with the pick, but it's far from a disgrace.

cascough wrote:So has Te'o, Davies etc really done more than JJ? Has Kruis, AWJ et al really done more than Launchbury? Why is it all about the Scottish exclusions for you?

You want to take issue with the his implied gameplan? I understand that. You want to question whether there are players are in better form? I understand that too. But to reduce it to something so basic as, there aren't many Scots, this is an outrage, then I struggle to understand the mindset with which you (and apparently an entire nation) approach the Lions.  

Because Scotland beat Ireland and Wales this year with key players playing better than their opposite numbers! Is it really that hard to understand?

Seriously anyone who supports or believes in the 'Lions' needs to have their head checked.

Get real and leave it in the past. The World Cup is the future and this folly of the amateur age should be once and for all put to bed.  

You really do need to examine your thinking if you believe the Lions is the future.

Looking at the contenders from Scotland:

WP Nel - Unlucky that injury ruled him out of 6Ns
Jonny Gray - a perceived area of strength, yet with 6 locks named (including apparently 3 from England) should perhaps be going.
Hamish Watson - probably deemed to be lightweight. Lions taking Tipuric instead it seems as the sole light option.
Greg Laidlaw - Could have gone as midweek captain, but would have been a single injury away from appearing in the Test squad.
Finn Russell - Along with Ford the best attacking options we have at 10. Probably been ruled out (again along with Ford) due to physique and perceived defensive frailties.
Alex Dunbar - not helped by the game at Twickenham
Sean Maitland/Tommy Seymour - both would offer something to the squad. At least one should have gone surely instead of 1/p, Earls or Nowell?


It feels to me that a lot of emphasis has been given to performances in the last set of matches between the four countries. Scotland smashed by England, Wales hitting form against Ireland and Ireland in turn proving too powerful for England. I also feel that, following Gats comments about Scottish coaches turning them down, Scottish players have had zero support in any discussions and not just 50/50 calls went the way of the non-scot.

I'm not far from being done with this thread as I can see where it is going and there's no further point in arguing this, but the point is that the Lions brand is about more than the 23 players that play in the test team - it is about 4 international rugby teams coming together, and the history that goes along with it. If Gatland picks 1 Scottish player out of 40 - especially when the vast majority of people could make a good argument for the inclusion of at least a few more - then Gatland really doesn't understand what he is in charge of.

For what it's worth I think Launchbury and JJ should travel, and Scott Williams will feel justifiably hard done by if Roberts is picked.

Even if only Hogg tours for Scotland he is pretty much a dead cert to start every test at 15 so I am very excited to see him add some magic to the Lions.

I think us Scottish fans should not feel too despondent at a largely English, Irish and Welsh touring party. Nel is injured, Laidlaw was injured but outsider to tour, Jones injured. Russell, R Gray, J Gray, Watson all up against very tough competition.

I think we have to be realistic and accept that only Hogg and Seymour are likely to tour due to the fact Scotland scored a ridiculous amount of tries thanks to these two players who are both highly skilled. My 3rd selection outsider would be Maitland due to the fact he would be able to handle pressure of NZ, has been in great form for Saracens and Scotland this season and is a solid defender that suits Gatland's coaching philosophy. Distant 4th, Watson, Gray, Visser, Russell, Dunbar, any of these players really. But then you're in the category of 'close but not quite' which covers another 100 odd players from the home nations.

It is the Scottish backs who are most deserving of selection really so i think it would be a fair reflection of Scotland's performances to have 2-3 Scottish backs touring and maybe 1 forward in J Gray.

I agree on Russell albeit Biggar is a very good player and his inclusion isnt unwarranted unlike Roberts and Halfpenny who are both way down the pecking order IMO.

bsando wrote:Even if only Hogg tours for Scotland he is pretty much a dead cert to start every test at 15 so I am very excited to see him add some magic to the Lions.

I think us Scottish fans should not feel too despondent at a largely English, Irish and Welsh touring party. Nel is injured, Laidlaw was injured but outsider to tour, Jones injured. Russell, R Gray, J Gray, Watson all up against very tough competition.

I think we have to be realistic and accept that only Hogg and Seymour are likely to tour due to the fact Scotland scored a ridiculous amount of tries thanks to these two players who are both highly skilled. My 3rd selection outsider would be Maitland due to the fact he would be able to handle pressure of NZ, has been in great form for Saracens and Scotland this season and is a solid defender that suits Gatland's coaching philosophy. Distant 4th, Watson, Gray, Visser, Russell, Dunbar, any of these players really. But then you're in the category of 'close but not quite' which covers another 100 odd players from the home nations.

It is the Scottish backs who are most deserving of selection really so i think it would be a fair reflection of Scotland's performances to have 2-3 Scottish backs touring and maybe 1 forward in J Gray.

Maitland is only rated in England because he plays in England. For me there are better Scottish players who didnt get selected.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

cascough wrote:So has Te'o, Davies etc really done more than JJ? Has Kruis, AWJ et al really done more than Launchbury? Why is it all about the Scottish exclusions for you?

You want to take issue with the his implied gameplan? I understand that. You want to question whether there are players are in better form? I understand that too. But to reduce it to something so basic as, there aren't many Scots, this is an outrage, then I struggle to understand the mindset with which you (and apparently an entire nation) approach the Lions.  

Because Scotland beat Ireland and Wales this year with key players playing better than their opposite numbers! Is it really that hard to understand?

So you expect a squad to be picked based on 1 game?

It was in 2013.

If all of these rumours are true and some of the best talent of the Home Nations are being overlooked because they do not fit with the suggested limited gameplan then I suggest that Gatland and his cronies has devalued the term 'British and Irish Lion'.

Any player selected on this tour should be referred to as a 'Gatland's Lion'.

If your support is conditional, that's not really support IMO.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

bsando wrote:Even if only Hogg tours for Scotland he is pretty much a dead cert to start every test at 15 so I am very excited to see him add some magic to the Lions.

I think us Scottish fans should not feel too despondent at a largely English, Irish and Welsh touring party. Nel is injured, Laidlaw was injured but outsider to tour, Jones injured. Russell, R Gray, J Gray, Watson all up against very tough competition.

I think we have to be realistic and accept that only Hogg and Seymour are likely to tour due to the fact Scotland scored a ridiculous amount of tries thanks to these two players who are both highly skilled. My 3rd selection outsider would be Maitland due to the fact he would be able to handle pressure of NZ, has been in great form for Saracens and Scotland this season and is a solid defender that suits Gatland's coaching philosophy. Distant 4th, Watson, Gray, Visser, Russell, Dunbar, any of these players really. But then you're in the category of 'close but not quite' which covers another 100 odd players from the home nations.

It is the Scottish backs who are most deserving of selection really so i think it would be a fair reflection of Scotland's performances to have 2-3 Scottish backs touring and maybe 1 forward in J Gray.

Maitland is only rated in England because he plays in England. For me there are better Scottish players who didnt get selected.

See where you're coming from for sure but I am a big fan of Maitland, in the past I have always touted him for Scottish selection when perhaps he wasn't quite in form. He is just one of those players who makes very few mistakes and does his job to a high standard. His physicality has improved somewhat playing for Saracens, he seems to score a lot more tries via a bit of footwork and breaking the tackle. In the past it was his positioning and pace that got him over the line. On those dry NZ paddocks he'll be able to show off his speed as well.

cascough wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

cascough wrote:So has Te'o, Davies etc really done more than JJ? Has Kruis, AWJ et al really done more than Launchbury? Why is it all about the Scottish exclusions for you?

You want to take issue with the his implied gameplan? I understand that. You want to question whether there are players are in better form? I understand that too. But to reduce it to something so basic as, there aren't many Scots, this is an outrage, then I struggle to understand the mindset with which you (and apparently an entire nation) approach the Lions.  

Because Scotland beat Ireland and Wales this year with key players playing better than their opposite numbers! Is it really that hard to understand?

So you expect a squad to be picked based on 1 game?

They didn't play Ireland and Wales in the same game.

cascough wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

cascough wrote:So has Te'o, Davies etc really done more than JJ? Has Kruis, AWJ et al really done more than Launchbury? Why is it all about the Scottish exclusions for you?

You want to take issue with the his implied gameplan? I understand that. You want to question whether there are players are in better form? I understand that too. But to reduce it to something so basic as, there aren't many Scots, this is an outrage, then I struggle to understand the mindset with which you (and apparently an entire nation) approach the Lions.  

Because Scotland beat Ireland and Wales this year with key players playing better than their opposite numbers! Is it really that hard to understand?

So you expect a squad to be picked based on 1 game?

Well I keep on hearing that the England game killed our chances! So yes, I think it has been picked on the basis of one game.

Wales have been measured on their performance against Ireland.
Ireland have been measured on their performance against England.
England have been measured on their performance against Scotland.
Scotland have been measured on their performance against England.

All the good work Scotland did against Wales and Ireland has been brushed under the carpet and the England game appears to be how we have been judged.

a great article on the BBC stated:

"What was called the 'big test' was the visit of the Welsh, who had so many Lions veterans in their ranks. The argument went that if Scotland could out-play Wales then Gatland would have to pay respect to that. The Scots were on the back foot for the opening half and then delivered a dominant 40 minutes.

They scored 20 unanswered points in the second half and won in a relative canter. Watson was a revelation. Wales had Sam Warburton and Justin Tipuric on the pitch but when Alun Wyn Jones was asked about the pivotal performer on the day he mentioned Watson and the chaos he wreaked on the Welsh breakdown. Wales were turned over 17 times."

It's almost as if none of the good Scottish performances never happened.

If you look back at my posts, you will find that I have been very modest in terms of the Scottish contingent I have selected regarding the Lions. Most of the Scottish posters are pretty realistic about the number of players we can realistically expect - we know how little Scotland are regarded, and we understand our limitations.

However, if we only get one player in an extended touring squad of 40, it will be an utter, total disgrace.

3 Scotsmen who should be on the plane:

Grey not Kruis
Maitland not Earls
Russell not Biggar

Henderson, Roberts, Falateau at least should not be there - either no form or poor form

I actually agree, mostly, with the prop selection.
No fit Scotsman or Welshman good enough

Warburton is definitely captain anyway.

Watson not SOB

This is so funny....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/39639299

It is just not as simple as thinking, right Scotland were pretty good, they deserve 7 tourists. Wales not so good, they can have 5. Ireland a bit better so It's 11 for them and then England can have 14. What if that means taking 9 locks but only 1 tighthead?

And then when you throw in a curveball of the players have to fit the coaches gameplan, plus 50/50 calls that are tough on anyone, those numbers and that representation really becomes irrelevant.

People all have their favourite players, but to call it a disgrace is a bit toys out of the pram, for me.

On apparent Jamie Roberts inclusion, although we all know there are many players who deserve to be included over him I think Gatland is allowed to have one or two of his own personal preferences. I'm sure McGeechan and Woodward etc had their own personal choices too.

If anything were to upset me it would be picking more than 10 Welsh players, a good few who are not in form over those from England, Ireland and Scotland who are undoubtedly playing well. Unfortunately, it is fairly easy for him to justify these decisions without much opposition.

cascough wrote:And then when you throw in a curveball of the players have to fit the coaches gameplan, plus 50/50 calls that are tough on anyone, those numbers and that representation really becomes irrelevant.

People all have their favourite players, but to call it a disgrace is a bit toys out of the pram, for me.

I can understand why Te'o say has gone instead of JJ due to fitting the coaches gameplan. I may disagree, but I understand. Having selected Te'o and Henshaw though, I really struggle to see how Jamie Roberts adds anything, other than being a Gats favourite (along with 1/2p). Allied to some of Gats comments in the last few weeks, I am coming round to the belief that it would have taken a 70/30 call to overide his belief in his old favourites. Maybe calling it a disgrace is a bit strong, but there are undertones of 205 in this purported selection.

cascough wrote:
People all have their favourite players, but to call it a disgrace is a bit toys out of the pram, for me.

I don't think it is at all, Scottish fans in particular have every right to feel aggrieved at Gatlands selection and they have every right to be done with the concept of the Lions, what is the point when the coach just picks his favourites regardless of form?

No gameplan can justify taking Jamie Roberts over Alex Dunbar or Keith Earls over Maitland or Seymour.

Ryan and a crocked AWJ over Jonny Gray is odd too, why risk an injured player in an area of strength?

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

cascough wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

cascough wrote:So has Te'o, Davies etc really done more than JJ? Has Kruis, AWJ et al really done more than Launchbury? Why is it all about the Scottish exclusions for you?

You want to take issue with the his implied gameplan? I understand that. You want to question whether there are players are in better form? I understand that too. But to reduce it to something so basic as, there aren't many Scots, this is an outrage, then I struggle to understand the mindset with which you (and apparently an entire nation) approach the Lions.  

Because Scotland beat Ireland and Wales this year with key players playing better than their opposite numbers! Is it really that hard to understand?

So you expect a squad to be picked based on 1 game?

Well I keep on hearing that the England game killed our chances! So yes, I think it has been picked on the basis of one game.

Wales have been measured on their performance against Ireland.
Ireland have been measured on their performance against England.
England have been measured on their performance against Scotland.
Scotland have been measured on their performance against England.

All the good work Scotland did against Wales and Ireland has been brushed under the carpet and the England game appears to be how we have been judged.

a great article on the BBC stated:

"What was called the 'big test' was the visit of the Welsh, who had so many Lions veterans in their ranks. The argument went that if Scotland could out-play Wales then Gatland would have to pay respect to that. The Scots were on the back foot for the opening half and then delivered a dominant 40 minutes.

They scored 20 unanswered points in the second half and won in a relative canter. Watson was a revelation. Wales had Sam Warburton and Justin Tipuric on the pitch but when Alun Wyn Jones was asked about the pivotal performer on the day he mentioned Watson and the chaos he wreaked on the Welsh breakdown. Wales were turned over 17 times."

It's almost as if none of the good Scottish performances never happened.

I agree largely with the overall sentiment that Scotland are underrepresented, but I think Jonathan Joseph might strongly disagree with the highlighted point! Ford to some extent too.

England are judged for the Ireland performance. Gatland said it before that game.

cascough wrote:It is just not as simple as thinking, right Scotland were pretty good, they deserve 7 tourists. Wales not so good, they can have 5. Ireland a bit better so It's 11 for them and then England can have 14. What if that means taking 9 locks but only 1 tighthead?

And then when you throw in a curveball of the players have to fit the coaches gameplan, plus 50/50 calls that are tough on anyone, those numbers and that representation really becomes irrelevant.

People all have their favourite players, but to call it a disgrace is a bit toys out of the pram, for me.

It is a disgrace, if true. I understand the dilemmas surrounding selection: Picking established partnerships, players who fit a pre-determined style of play, inherent bias, lack of scottish representation on the coaching panel, Scotland having historically been rubbish for much of the last decade. I get it all. Thats what you will never find my suggesting that we have 10+ players etc who should tour.

However, our performances since the world cup seem to have been totally ignored, albeit the one terrible performance against England. We have some very good players who deserve to tour. Look at it from our perspective Cascough, and then you might understand why we are so annoyed.

What was the point in him taking all that time off? Why do professional coaches only argue for selection of players they currently coach? Why is he taking injured players and players with barely a game under their belts?

At least Earls had a very good six nations. He was Ireland's best winger and joint top try scorer. Roberts didnt even start any games.

But you can also see it like a boxing fight where a guy loses every round narrowly. The scorecard makes the fight more one sided than it was, but they are still fair.

Not saying that's the case but also don't see many 'must picks'.

It's not the inclusion of Roberts at the expense of JJ that bothers me, it's the implication that we're going to try and see what happens if you play Gatlandball with the All Blacks. Again.

Answer = lose.

No 7&1/2 wrote:What was the point in him taking all that time off? Why do professional coaches only argue for selection of players they currently coach? Why is he taking injured players and players with barely a game under their belts?

Conflict of interest. He went to visit all the home nations in training to see the players, he wouldn't be allowed that access as Wales coach, especially in the Six Nations.

I think his bias is more inherent then conscious, he's not going to deliberately risk his best chance at a series victory to not upset his mates, but his proximity to certain players for so long will off course mean he leans towards them.

Injured players with barely a game under their belt still have a month+ of season left before the start of the tour and another few weeks between that and the first test. Plenty of time.

Have to say, if that is the squad that has been selected, you have to feel for the likes of Joseph, Russell, Maitland, Seymour, Grey brothers, Launchbery, how the likes of Roberts, Davies even my Team player Biggar over Russell, Teo shouldn't be ahead of Joseph, Earls over either of the Scottish wingers is a travesty.
The one real pleasure for me over that team is the Non selection of Hartley, he's not good enough and he's a thug, with his disciplinary record he should never be anywhere near the England team never mind the Lions, and I have to say really pleased with the Halfpenny selection as his kicking could have the greatest impact at the end of this tour. Just to add Hogg is first choice at the moment.

wayne wrote:Have to say, if that is the squad that has been selected, you have to feel for the likes of Joseph, Russell, Maitland, Seymour, Grey brothers, Launchbery, how the likes of Roberts, Davies even my Team player Biggar over Russell, Teo shouldn't be ahead of Joseph, Earls over either of the Scottish wingers is a travesty.
The one real pleasure for me over that team is the Non selection of Hartley, he's not good enough and he's a thug, with his disciplinary record he should never be anywhere near the England team never mind the Lions, and I have to say really pleased with the Halfpenny selection as his kicking could have the greatest impact at the end of this tour. Just to add Hogg is first choice at the moment.

Dylan 'not good enough' Hartley has a 68% international win rate.

I hope that isn't the squad as selected. It would be a real failure to include only Hogg from Scotland, and selecting Biggar, Roberts and 1/2p rubs it in. I don't think they should prefer a Scottish player to a better player from the other nations just to get them into the squad, but that's not what would be happening here. There are better Scottish options than those three, for starters.

More broadly, the pack is going to be strong, it's the three-quarters that look inadequate to take on NZ, particularly the centres. There's just not enough pace and skill.

So basically robbo what some of us feared when he was chosen again. Ignoring form. Picking who he knows. I reckon I could have a fair stab at his starting 15 now.