LIONS STARTING TEST 13

First topic message reminder :

Pick a lad there, Gary most in form, Joseph most English, Davies most credit in the bank, Jones most southern hemispherish.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:I don't even think Jones was that good, scoring two tries in the England game somewhat paints over how poor he was in that game.

He played well in all 4 of his games, He set up Hoggs try against Ireland and his other against France, he also linked both of the tries against Wales and Scored a brace against England. What more do you want from an outside centre?

It's between Ringose and JJ for me, both had good overall tournaments, whereas Ringrose was more consistent JJ was more devestating in a peaky/troughy kind of way.

I want more than just isolated moments of quality, he was terrible against England and scoring two meaningless consolation tries doesn't make his performance any better.

I think you are doing England a terrible disservice.

England were the best they have ever been under Jones when Scotland played England at Twickenham in terms of their accuracy and execution of first phase ball that specifically targeted the midfield of Scotland. I have said on other threads too much is being made of the missed tackles in the midfield in that game as opposed to the sensational English attack that gave the Scottish midfield too many players to defend against.

Look at the Liam Williams try for a great comparrison against England. He went through first phase un touched by the English defence via a masterfully crafted set piece move. That doesn't mean that Farrell can't defend or played terrible.

The Scottish midfield missed very few tackles in that game and were left trying to defend 5 men in a channel with only 2 defenders. This move worked twice, however that doesn't mean Huw Jones was terrible. He never gave up and was rewarded with 2 tries, consolation or otherwise Scotland scored more tries against England than anyone else.

It's moot anyway since he is injured.

The Wales try against us was one moment, we cut straight through your midfield at least four times, as a collective defensive unit you need to adapt and your centres are pivotal in that.

I understand trying to cling to anything glimmer of positivity but Jones was terrible in that game and it's the game that Gatland will be judging the majority of the Scottish players on.

So our good performances against Wales and Ireland didn't exist? Tell me why exactly England's dismal showing against Ireland won't be the game Gatland will judge the English players on?

We may have leaked tries against England, but at least our attack with a backline composed of 2 scrumhalfs and 2 flyhalfs still scored tries! Your attack was a stuttering embarasment against Ireland, dropped balls, knock-ons and a lineout that barely won any ball at all.

Losing a close game against Ireland in Ireland after winning 18 games in a row is easy to overlook, it's not so easy to overlook conceding 60+ points is it.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:I don't even think Jones was that good, scoring two tries in the England game somewhat paints over how poor he was in that game.

He played well in all 4 of his games, He set up Hoggs try against Ireland and his other against France, he also linked both of the tries against Wales and Scored a brace against England. What more do you want from an outside centre?

It's between Ringose and JJ for me, both had good overall tournaments, whereas Ringrose was more consistent JJ was more devestating in a peaky/troughy kind of way.

I want more than just isolated moments of quality, he was terrible against England and scoring two meaningless consolation tries doesn't make his performance any better.

I think you are doing England a terrible disservice.

England were the best they have ever been under Jones when Scotland played England at Twickenham in terms of their accuracy and execution of first phase ball that specifically targeted the midfield of Scotland. I have said on other threads too much is being made of the missed tackles in the midfield in that game as opposed to the sensational English attack that gave the Scottish midfield too many players to defend against.

Look at the Liam Williams try for a great comparrison against England. He went through first phase un touched by the English defence via a masterfully crafted set piece move. That doesn't mean that Farrell can't defend or played terrible.

The Scottish midfield missed very few tackles in that game and were left trying to defend 5 men in a channel with only 2 defenders. This move worked twice, however that doesn't mean Huw Jones was terrible. He never gave up and was rewarded with 2 tries, consolation or otherwise Scotland scored more tries against England than anyone else.

It's moot anyway since he is injured.

The Wales try against us was one moment, we cut straight through your midfield at least four times, as a collective defensive unit you need to adapt and your centres are pivotal in that.

I understand trying to cling to anything glimmer of positivity but Jones was terrible in that game and it's the game that Gatland will be judging the majority of the Scottish players on.

To be fair to Jones, Laidlaw mentioned at half time in that game that Russell had abandoned the defensive set up - he charge out of the line to try and hit ford (who was supposed to be targeted by the openside) a couple of times. Jones was left trying to defend three people. I'm not saying he defended well, but he was left in the lurch by those inside him and because of how well England attacked that channel.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Losing a close game against Ireland in Ireland after winning 18 games in a row is easy to overlook, it's not so easy to overlook conceding 60+ points is it.

You are being deliberately belligerent because you know our back-line was in tatters from the 22nd minute.

I would love to see how England would get on against a team like the All blacks (I'm using the All Blacks as a comparrison because there is noone higher up the world rankings for England to play) with this backline for three quarters of the game:

9. Care
10. Farrell
11. Youngs
12. JJ
13. Teo
14. Daly
15. Ford

My guess is you'd ship a barrowload of point too!

You know as well as I do that injuries crippled Scotland, full credit for England exploiting this, but it's the primary reason the Score was so horrific.

Scotland should be fairly judged over all of their games in the 6N and if they aren't judged fairly across all the games, those picked for the Lions should just stick 2 fingers up to Gatland like Townsend did, and do their own bloody thing. Quite frankly if Gatland focuses on one game to judge us, his tenure as coach will be a disaster and the Lions ethos will be dead and buried.

Anyway, I think 13 is one of the more contentious positions, nobody has really stood out and demanded the spot.  JJ had a great game against Scotland, but outside of that he was solid if unspectacular. Ringrose was good, but I would argue he is slightly too inexperienced. Davies was ok.

They are all much of a muchness, and I wouldn't grumble if any were chosen to start.

My bolter for that position is Daly.

mikey_dragon wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:What a load of crap.

Great point, and very well made.

I think taking JD2 would be a mistake and he's a player on standby at best. JJ, Payne and perhaps Henshaw as 12/13 for me. Why do people keep making the case for Ringrose, I didn't think he was good except for against Italy. Is it just me?

He was very good against England and is getting better with every game. He played well in November too.

I doubt Ringrose will tour, but he should have a bright future.

Looks a talent, but pretty raw and prone to mistakes (still young though and plenty of time to sort that out).

Duplicate.

He probably wont alright. I would like if he and Hendshaw were picked though as it would bring them forward more than a tour to Japan.

Golden wrote:I would have Farrell at 12 and Henshaw at 13 personally.

I think that could be a runner, particularly if Farrell is played at 12.

Personally I think defense is the strongest part of JJ's game. His positioning and decision-making is top class. He's supremely good at judging when and by how far to come out of the line, and has the legs to scrag anyone that steps inside him.

When he *does* rush out of the line for an intercept....it's a score.

He's not a showboating big-hitter, but defence is about more than that.

6N stats from ESPN (JJ one less game):

JD 31 tackles made, 6 missed
RR 37 tackles made, 8 missed
JJ 23 tackles made, 1 missed

mid_gen wrote:
RR 37 tackles made, 8 missed

Ring Rose? (Ring O'Roses?)

I thought about Henshaw at 13 - does he have the out and out pace?

Hang on - why hasn't anyone commented on the obvious absentess on that poll?

Big Phil Vickery has not yet retired (to the best of my knowledge) and Gavin Henson is still running around on the paddock.

Of course who would start and who would bench between these two would be a fascinating discussion, but to miss them off the roster is tantamount to vandalism.

Defending isn't the be all and end all though, obtaining the same stats for the Scottish contingent from the same source of ESPN:

Dunbar:
Italy Game 5 made 0 missed
England Game 10 made 1 missed
Wales Game 9 made 0 missed
France Game 11 made 2 missed
Ireland Game 17 made 5 missed

Huw Jones:
Italy Game 0 made 0 missed (injured early on)
England Game 8 made 1 missed
Wales Game 6 made 1 missed
France Game 10 made 1 missed
Ireland Game 10 made 4 missed

Dunbar's biggest strength though is turnovers, he finished 2nd in the Tournament with 13 turnovers which is an average of 3 a game.

Defending is important, but the way I see it, rapid turnovers and counter attacking rugby will be the best way for the Lions to beat NZ.

I'm not advocating Dunbar starts, or even tours to be honest, but more of a consideration needs to be given to players other than defending stats.

I'd like Dunbar to go, great player, and better than Huw Jones in my opinion, who still looks raw and I'm not quite sure he's quite settled at Test level yet. But he does have potential, not least in scoring tries.

Can't help but feel but the England game saw Dunbar's chances take a big blow. Would be happy if he went though, I feel he's got the all round attributes needed.

The England game gave every Scot a kick in the chances but since we are not exactly overwhelmed with quality in the middle i think Dunbar is an excellent choice. But he won't go.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Losing a close game against Ireland in Ireland after winning 18 games in a row is easy to overlook, it's not so easy to overlook conceding 60+ points is it.

You are being deliberately belligerent because you know our back-line was in tatters from the 22nd minute.

I would love to see how England would get on against a team like the All blacks (I'm using the All Blacks as a comparrison because there is noone higher up the world rankings for England to play) with this backline for three quarters of the game:

9. Care
10. Farrell
11. Youngs
12. JJ
13. Teo
14. Daly
15. Ford

My guess is you'd ship a barrowload of point too!

You know as well as I do that injuries crippled Scotland, full credit for England exploiting this, but it's the primary reason the Score was so horrific.

Scotland should be fairly judged over all of their games in the 6N and if they aren't judged fairly across all the games, those picked for the Lions should just stick 2 fingers up to Gatland like Townsend did, and do their own bloody thing. Quite frankly if Gatland focuses on one game to judge us, his tenure as coach will be a disaster and the Lions ethos will be dead and buried.

England would rejuggle that back-line to have Ford/Farrell/Te'o at 10/12/13, Joseph on the wing and Daly at full-back. I'd probably switch Care onto the wing and I don't think we'd have much excuse for our defence being terrible in that situation.

I don't think Scotland had enough credit in the bank to completely swallow the scale of the loss against England - and not just the midfield. The forwards got comprehensively outplayed, and I'm not sure they could afford that. A lot of the Scots had played themselves into contention with their wins over Ireland and Wales, but most had only established themselves as marginal calls, there were very few "certs" before they lost to England.

Some England players will suffer from the Ireland loss, again the marginal calls like Youngs and Ford, but the players who already had their bags packed (e.g. Cole and Farrell) will be able to brush it off.

I just think there are more England players with enough credit in the bank to brush off a poor performance against Ireland, than there are Scottish players with enough credit in the bank to brush off a very poor performance against England.

I would say Johnny Gray, Hamish Watson, Tommy Seymour and Stuart Hogg will make it. But where you had Fraser Brown, Richie Gray, John Barclay, Finn Russell and Alex Dunbar who may have been pushing themselves into the selectors minds who are going to find it harder to break in, especially in the hotly contested positions.

Strauss and Laidlaw suffered with injuries during the tournament taking a chance to impress away, and Huw Jones is now ruled out the tour so drops out of contention.

Isn't Jones sadly injured but looked a good player.

I would go with Joseph because he has the most pace.  We need to pick players who will concern the AB's.   I feel the AB's would not worry at all about JD2.

Outside 4 of Joseph, North, Watson and Hogg would be interesting as all have pace.

robbo277 wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Losing a close game against Ireland in Ireland after winning 18 games in a row is easy to overlook, it's not so easy to overlook conceding 60+ points is it.

You are being deliberately belligerent because you know our back-line was in tatters from the 22nd minute.

I would love to see how England would get on against a team like the All blacks (I'm using the All Blacks as a comparrison because there is noone higher up the world rankings for England to play) with this backline for three quarters of the game:

9. Care
10. Farrell
11. Youngs
12. JJ
13. Teo
14. Daly
15. Ford

My guess is you'd ship a barrowload of point too!

You know as well as I do that injuries crippled Scotland, full credit for England exploiting this, but it's the primary reason the Score was so horrific.

Scotland should be fairly judged over all of their games in the 6N and if they aren't judged fairly across all the games, those picked for the Lions should just stick 2 fingers up to Gatland like Townsend did, and do their own bloody thing. Quite frankly if Gatland focuses on one game to judge us, his tenure as coach will be a disaster and the Lions ethos will be dead and buried.

England would rejuggle that back-line to have Ford/Farrell/Te'o at 10/12/13, Joseph on the wing and Daly at full-back. I'd probably switch Care onto the wing and I don't think we'd have much excuse for our defence being terrible in that situation.

I don't think Scotland had enough credit in the bank to completely swallow the scale of the loss against England - and not just the midfield. The forwards got comprehensively outplayed, and I'm not sure they could afford that. A lot of the Scots had played themselves into contention with their wins over Ireland and Wales, but most had only established themselves as marginal calls, there were very few "certs" before they lost to England.

Some England players will suffer from the Ireland loss, again the marginal calls like Youngs and Ford, but the players who already had their bags packed (e.g. Cole and Farrell) will be able to brush it off.

I just think there are more England players with enough credit in the bank to brush off a poor performance against Ireland, than there are Scottish players with enough credit in the bank to brush off a very poor performance against England.

I would say Johnny Gray, Hamish Watson, Tommy Seymour and Stuart Hogg will make it. But where you had Fraser Brown, Richie Gray, John Barclay, Finn Russell and Alex Dunbar who may have been pushing themselves into the selectors minds who are going to find it harder to break in, especially in the hotly contested positions.

Strauss and Laidlaw suffered with injuries during the tournament taking a chance to impress away, and Huw Jones is now ruled out the tour so drops out of contention.

England have the luxury of an enormous player pool. To put into context, England has more referees than Scotland has players! Of course England would have been able to better adapt!

The Scottish forwards IMO didn't have too bad against England, we struggled on the attacking side of things despite Gordy Reid Scoring a try, but England made very little gain up front and we won quite a few turnovers despite Barclay being on the bad side of the ref.

If Russel, Watson, Gray, Seymour and Hogg make the tour I'd say that's a fair reflection of our progress this year and will reward the players who have performed well. Alex Dunbar or Duncan Taylor I would assume may be called up as injury replacements potentially along with the other Gray brother.

I do get what you are saying about this whole credit in the bank thing, but I don't know where the Welsh bank credit is, they have been dire all season, and are similar to Scotland circa 2010, almost incapable of scoring tries!

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:England have the luxury of an enormous player pool. To put into context, England has more referees than Scotland has players! Of course England would have been able to better adapt!

That's a great stat, until you start wondering how on earth Wayne Barnes has risen so far.....

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:England have the luxury of an enormous player pool. To put into context, England has more referees than Scotland has players! Of course England would have been able to better adapt!

The Scottish forwards IMO didn't have too bad against England, we struggled on the attacking side of things despite Gordy Reid Scoring a try, but England made very little gain up front and we won quite a few turnovers despite Barclay being on the bad side of the ref.

If Russel, Watson, Gray, Seymour and Hogg make the tour I'd say that's a fair reflection of our progress this year and will reward the players who have performed well. Alex Dunbar or Duncan Taylor I would assume may be called up as injury replacements potentially along with the other Gray brother.

I do get what you are saying about this whole credit in the bank thing, but I don't know where the Welsh bank credit is, they have been dire all season, and are similar to Scotland circa 2010, almost incapable of scoring tries!

I think England would have been able to adapt just picking 10 players for a starting backline and 3 subs for a conventional 5-and-3 bench. To get to that back-line, England would need to start with Youngs, Ford, Watson, Farrell, Joseph, Daly and Brown, with Care, Te'o and Nowell on the bench and lose Watson, Brown and Nowell - and even then I still don't think we'd be too out of sorts. So not sure if player-pool comes into it, just the versatility of England's starting team coming into play.

I'd say to a man the Scottish centres have pushed themselves ahead of the Welsh centres (certainly in my book, even if not in the one that counts). But Farrell and Joseph are ahead after their run, and I'd have Henshaw before I'd have Dunbar. I'd have had Jones ahead of Ringrose and Payne, but injuries have taken his chance away. So maybe one of Dunbar or Russell might come in depending on where Gatland will use Farrell, but Gatland could also go with Ford as his extra option at 10 and/or one of Daly or Payne as a centre/back three cover option.

With regards to the Welsh players and their credit in the bank, as well as the Welsh players who are showing good form (Owens, Warburton, Tipuric, Webb), there are also a number of players who have been there and done it. Their credit doesn't come from their form, it comes in spite of their form (AWJ, Biggar, North - who showed glimpses over the tournament, Halfpenny). When the chips are down, which they will be at some stage, you're going to want players who have experienced this and can pick the team up.

If you're basing your case for selection on your form, one bad game hurts more than if you're basing your selection on reputation, as it can be put down at a blip. AWJ doesn't lose his experience of captaining the Lions to a series victory in Australia when he made errors over the Six Nations, but the Gray brothers lose some of their shine if Scotland suffer a big loss.

Note, I wouldn't just take the 2013 Lions +/- a few, but reputation has to count for something, alongside form.

Whilst I do think Lions experience is useful, it would come a distant second for me over form shown in the last 12 months.

I'm not saying that to promote Scots either. The only shoe-in Scot for me is Stuart Hogg. The rest are all debatable.

As for centres, I see Farrell going as a 10/12 (enabling Gatland to pick two further 10s, likely to be Sexton plus one from Biggar, Russell and Ford), Henshaw (12/13) and Joseph (13). I would be very surprised if those three didn't go. Because of Farrell's versatility, he could then pick two further centres. I would see the shortlist being as follows: JD2, S Williams, Dunbar, Teo and Ringrose. I would be surprised if Gatland didn't pick JD2. The last spot for me would be a straight call between Dunbar and Ringrose. Two different types of player - Dunbar being a more powerful player and Ringrose having a more expansive attacking quality. Horses for courses.

cb wrote:Isn't Jones sadly injured but looked a good player.

I would go with Joseph because he has the most pace.  We need to pick players who will concern the AB's.   I feel the AB's would not worry at all about JD2.

Outside 4 of Joseph, North, Watson and Hogg would be interesting as all have pace.

Tamanivalu might