Best Lions opposition team since 1989.

1. Mtawarira
2. Gatland  
3. Du Randt
4. Nobody Capt
5. Matfield
6. Collins
7. McCaw
8. Zinzan
9. Joost
10. Carter
11. Roff - should be Jonah
12. Jean De Villiers
13. Umaga (reluctantly)
14. Campese
15. Burke

save for later

15 Andre Joubert 1997
14
13
12 Tim Horan 1989
11 David Campese 1989
10
9 Joost Van Der Huisen 1997
8
7
6
5
4
3 Sean Fitzpatrick - 1993
1 Os Du Randt - 1997

Liam Williams to be the best player on this tour. What's the bet?

So going from the time I started watching rugby (2003) this would be mine.

15. Folau
14. Habana
13. Umaga
12. De Viliers
11. Sivivatu
10. Carter
9. Genia
8. So'oialo
7. McCaw
6. Burger
5. Matfield
4. Botha
3. Hayman
2. Smit
1. Woodcock

Was tempted to put in the entire vintage of 2005.

Great side mikey.

You missed out watching Joost VdW, Roff and Burke.

Its a pity to have Umaga in the side especially as a Lions opposition for obvious reasons.

The 05 side while good were made to look a lot better by an incompetent management team and Lions selection based on the 2003 RWC not the 2005 6 Nations. Glad that it is not the case this year.

Gwlad wrote:Great side mikey.

You missed out watching Joost VdW, Roff and Burke.

Its a pity to have Umaga in the side especially as a Lions opposition for obvious reasons.

The 05 side while good were made to look a lot better by an incompetent management team and Lions selection based on the 2003 RWC not the 2005 6 Nations. Glad that it is not the case this year.

You don't know that yet. That wasn't the description of the 2005 side one month before they left. This years side will run into massive problems on the field with this itenerary and they could be facing yet the best AB side ever.

The way our Super sides are thrashing even the best overseas sides in some cases suggest this years side will be even better than any before it, as a Lions tour will bring out the very best in them. And at the moment, that's looking, very, very good.

There is already suggestion that this sides selection is also poor and that it isn't the best coaching available, a Jones/ Schmidt alliance a far better option. As unavailable as they may be, both have had experience of beating the ABs, and have lead recent successful tours and 6Ns.

Gatland hasn't, and only has a 2-1 win against a poor oz side in 2013 who were also thrashed by NZ 3-0 and the Boks 2-0 and later by England as well.

Not a good pedigree for this tour.

Taylorman wrote:

Gwlad wrote:Great side mikey.

You missed out watching Joost VdW, Roff and Burke.

Its a pity to have Umaga in the side especially as a Lions opposition for obvious reasons.

The 05 side while good were made to look a lot better by an incompetent management team and Lions selection based on the 2003 RWC not the 2005 6 Nations. Glad that it is not the case this year.

You don't know that yet. That wasn't the description of the 2005 side one month before they left. This years side will run into massive problems on the field with this itenerary and they could be facing yet the best AB side ever.

The way our Super sides are thrashing even the best overseas sides in some cases suggest this years side will be even better than any before it, as a Lions tour will bring out the very best in them. And at the moment, that's looking, very, very good.

There is already suggestion that this sides selection is also poor and that it isn't the best coaching available, a Jones/ Schmidt alliance a far better option. As unavailable as they may be, both have had experience of beating the ABs, and have lead recent successful tours and 6Ns.

Gatland hasn't, and only has a 2-1 win against a poor oz side in 2013 who were also thrashed by NZ 3-0 and the Boks 2-0 and later by England as well.

Not a good pedigree for this tour.

More of your nonsense

I know Gats isn't an idiot like Sir Clive.

This tour selection is the strongest since the 70s

The ABs are nowhere near the side they were before Carter and McCaw left, even Read looks cooked.

As for Lions coaches Schmidt and Jones

Schmidt just folded in the 6 Nations

Eddie just choked a Slam. Can't handle pressure games and hasn't been able to since 2003

Neither have Lions experience

Gatland's won a Lions tour in OZ and were it not for an English prop and an irish kicker would have been on the winning coach of another

Whoever is making these suggestions knows as much as you.  

Why don't you post your best Lions opposition team as per thread?

Gwlad wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Gwlad wrote:Great side mikey.

You missed out watching Joost VdW, Roff and Burke.

Its a pity to have Umaga in the side especially as a Lions opposition for obvious reasons.

The 05 side while good were made to look a lot better by an incompetent management team and Lions selection based on the 2003 RWC not the 2005 6 Nations. Glad that it is not the case this year.

You don't know that yet. That wasn't the description of the 2005 side one month before they left. This years side will run into massive problems on the field with this itenerary and they could be facing yet the best AB side ever.

The way our Super sides are thrashing even the best overseas sides in some cases suggest this years side will be even better than any before it, as a Lions tour will bring out the very best in them. And at the moment, that's looking, very, very good.

There is already suggestion that this sides selection is also poor and that it isn't the best coaching available, a Jones/ Schmidt alliance a far better option. As unavailable as they may be, both have had experience of beating the ABs, and have lead recent successful tours and 6Ns.

Gatland hasn't, and only has a 2-1 win against a poor oz side in 2013 who were also thrashed by NZ 3-0 and the Boks 2-0 and later by England as well.

Not a good pedigree for this tour.

More of your nonsense

I know Gats isn't an idiot like Sir Clive.

This tour selection is the strongest since the 70s

The ABs are nowhere near the side they were before Carter and McCaw left, even Read looks cooked.

As for Lions coaches Schmidt and Jones

Schmidt just folded in the 6 Nations

Eddie just choked a Slam. Can't handle pressure games and hasn't been able to since 2003

Neither have Lions experience

Gatland's won a Lions tour in OZ and were it not for an English prop and an irish kicker would have been on the winning coach of another

Whoever is making these suggestions knows as much as you.  

Well if you believe all that then you're in for some reality check.

If a poll were held in the U.K. Who would be rated the best UK and Ire coach of the last two years?

Gatland. No. In no way shape or form would Gatland come out on top. And I don't even live there.

I'd even guess than a poll in Wales wouldn't even have him first. So the fact is, the best coach is not on tour. That will be a major talking point if the side loses. You don't bring second best to NZ.

Now why is this the best Lions team since the 70's?

Cos it hasn't lost yet perhaps? I don't get why people think this is the case. I can't name one player that would be a certainty selection over a current AB. Can you? Perhaps a prop as it's not something I know how to compare easily.

Murray might make it as sub but the way Smith and Perenara are playing he wouldn't make the squad. And so on.

Barrett would be the best player anywhere at the moment so Carter has probably been replaced by an even better player, certainly on attack.

McCaw will always be irreplaceable but to dismiss the current side on that basis is lazy thinking, Cane and Savea have stepped up brilliantly and will get better this year.

Gatland is the most successful coach in the NH and has won a Lions tour, thats all i need to know.

A Lion is not an All Black, its a much bigger deal, and it reveals your intrinsic arrogance that you suggest there isn't a single player who'd be selected over an All Black. What an utterly absurd idea and frankly who cares.

Gwlad wrote:Gatland is the most successful coach in the NH and has won a Lions tour, thats all i need to know.

A Lion is not an All Black, its a much bigger deal, and it reveals your intrinsic arrogance that you suggest there isn't a single player who'd be selected over an All Black. What an utterly absurd idea and frankly who cares.

A much bigger deal, for who?

The Lions are practically always cannon fodder here. If that's a bigger deal then good luck to that.

You claim this to be the best side since the 70's.

I think the 93 side was better than this. They levelled the series with the biggest ever win against the ABs.

Names like Andrew, Barnes, Guscott, Carling, Robert Jones, both the Hastings brothers, both Underwoods, Jason Leonard, Martin Johnson, Dean Richards, Peter Winterbottom formed a very formidable squad and the win in Wellington after a very close first test stunned the All Blacks, who at the time thought they were on a hiding to nothing.

It took a massive effort to run the Lions down in the third test and if this years side is as good as that was, then it will be very good indeed but I don't believe the Lions will get close to winning a test by 13 points, nearly win another and go into the third as favourites.

Still think this years will be better than that?

I don't.

Andrew…no need to read on after that and you think you know anything about the Lions

With due respect Nz already have problems with injuries Kaino.Read,Dixon,Coles
Milner-Skudder,Dagg,Kerr-Barlow,Ben Smith,Charlie Ngatai,SBW all injured or
recovering from.
With the conveyor belt still running how much does Luke Whitelock to enter
the frame,Cane?i`d start Todd at 7 every game.
1993 one of the worst eras in AB history loss to England followed by the
tour from hell one of the worst in their history.

Gwlad wrote:Andrew…no need to read on after that and you think you know anything about the Lions

Andrew was/is (I have no idea how he's getting on at Suffolk CCC) a lousy administrator. But he did make Bill McLaren's all time world XV ( )


As far as Lions opponents go

1 Os Du Randt
2 Sean Fitzpatrick
3 Olo Brown
4 Victor Matfield
5 John Eales
6 Jerry Collins
7 George Smith (4 tests, edges M. Jones - McCaw only played 2 vs the Lions)
8 Zinzan Brooke
9 Joost van der Westhuizen
10 Dan Carter
11 Joe Roff/Sivivatu
12 Jean de Villiers
13 Tana Umaga (an alternate centre pairing of Mauger and Bunce would also be tasty)
14 Brian Habana
15 Matt Burke (44 points in 2 starts & a bench cap)/Muliaina

emack2 wrote:With due respect Nz already have problems with injuries Kaino.Read,Dixon,Coles
Milner-Skudder,Dagg,Kerr-Barlow,Ben Smith,Charlie Ngatai,SBW all injured or
recovering from.
With the conveyor belt still running how much does Luke Whitelock to enter
the frame,Cane?i`d start Todd at 7 every game.
1993 one of the worst eras in AB history loss to England followed by the
tour from hell one of the worst in their history.

Yes hopefully Ngatai gets on the field soon, think he's playing club rugby this or next week. Kaino, Read, Smith all went down this weekend so hopefully they all come right. Does mean they get a bit of a rest from the contact but yes the injury toll is a bit of a concern.

Can't see Hansen varying from a Cane start Savea sub at all for this series Alan.

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

Gwlad wrote:Andrew…no need to read on after that and you think you know anything about the Lions

Andrew was/is (I have no idea how he's getting on at Suffolk CCC) a lousy administrator. But he did make Bill McLaren's all time world XV ( )


As far as Lions opponents go

1 Os Du Randt
2 Sean Fitzpatrick
3 Olo Brown
4 Victor Matfield
5 John Eales
6 Jerry Collins
7 George Smith (4 tests, edges M. Jones - McCaw only played 2 vs the Lions)
8 Zinzan Brooke
9 Joost van der Westhuizen
10 Dan Carter
11 Joe Roff/Sivivatu
12 Jean de Villiers
13 Tana Umaga (an alternate centre pairing of Mauger and Bunce would also be tasty)
14 Brian Habana
15 Matt Burke (44 points in 2 starts & a bench cap)/Muliaina

Preferred Bunce myself Pete, good lineout options with two skylabs and zinny, but something tells me after this series a lot of those names are going to be replaced by new ones!

Mine's a bit biased toward those of the 21st century but I'll give it a shot

1. Mtawarira
2. Mealamu
3. Hayman
4. Eales
5. Matfield
6. Smith
7. McCaw
8. Brooke
9. Van Der Westhuizen
10. Carter
11. Habana
12. Umaga
13. Fourie
14. Campese
15. Muliaina

123456789 wrote:Mine's a bit biased toward those of the 21st century but I'll give it a shot

1. Mtawarira
2. Mealamu
3. Hayman
4. Eales
5. Matfield
6. Smith
7. McCaw
8. Brooke
9. Van Der Westhuizen
10. Carter
11. Habana
12. Umaga
13. Fourie
14. Campese
15. Muliaina

Mealamu AND Umaga…….the dirty combo.

Something like:
Muliaina.
Gear or Vaiga Tuigamala
Umaga
Mauger Or Frank Bunce
Sivivatu
Carter 
Kelliher

Forwards
Woodcock
Fitzpaztrick Or Mealamu
Hayman
Robin Brooke
Ali Williams
Collins Or Zinny
McCaw Or The Iceman.
So'olialo.

were it not for an English prop and an irish kicker would have been on the winning coach of another

Yes..that's the Lions spirit.

aucklandlaurie wrote:Something like:
Muliaina.
Gear or Vaiga Tuigamala
Umaga
Mauger Or Frank Bunce
Sivivatu
Carter 
Kelliher

Forwards
Woodcock
Fitzpaztrick Or Mealamu
Hayman
Robin Brooke
Ali Williams
Collins Or Zinny
McCaw Or The Iceman.
So'olialo.

So plenty of room for your Southern Hemisphere brethren then

I can't name one player that would be a certainty selection over a current AB. Can you? Perhaps a prop as it's not something I know how to compare easily

As good as NZ are, I think you're a little out of touch there Taylor.

Prop and centre are not great areas of strength at the minute for you and could be improved. Perhaps with LB coming through and SBW back, this might change.

1. - LH is probably your weakest position, Moody wouldn't get in a top 10.
2. - Quality
3. TH Franks not great, certainly be improved
4. Quality
5. Quality
6. Kaino very good but on the decline, tough
7. Cane decent but nowhere Pocock
8. Read, another tough call with Billy close

9. Quality
10. Quality
11. Quality
12. SBW amazing but just coming back, open to debate
13. Another tight call, plenty around Fekitoa's level
14. Quality
15. Smith great but Hogg and Folau pushing close

For me, NZ haven't got the best players in 5/6 positions but it's all opinions. Individuals also do not make a team.

15. Smith great but Hogg and Folau pushing close

Smith is by far the best fullback in the world. Folau, as fine a specimen as he is, is actually not that good (eg defence).

13. Another tight call, plenty around Fekitoa's level

Agree with that, don't rate Fekitoa, and he won't be our first choice in the position

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

I can't name one player that would be a certainty selection over a current AB. Can you? Perhaps a prop as it's not something I know how to compare easily

As good as NZ are, I think you're a little out of touch there Taylor.

Prop and centre are not great areas of strength at the minute for you and could be improved. Perhaps with LB coming through and SBW back, this might change.

1. - LH is probably your weakest position, Moody wouldn't get in a top 10.
2. - Quality
3. TH Franks not great, certainly be improved
4. Quality
5. Quality
6. Kaino very good but on the decline, tough
7. Cane decent but nowhere Pocock
8. Read, another tough call with Billy close

9. Quality
10. Quality
11. Quality
12. SBW amazing but just coming back, open to debate
13. Another tight call, plenty around Fekitoa's level
14. Quality
15. Smith great but Hogg and Folau pushing close

For me, NZ haven't got the best players in 5/6 positions but it's all opinions. Individuals also do not make a team.

My initial question was how many Lions on tour would make the AB's. Pocock and Folau are out and I'd suggest you're very out of touch where both are concerned. Pocock is not playing 7, playing at 8 for Oz, and not always convincingly.

Hooper has been at 7 all that time so its a difficult comparison. Certainly Pocock has not been an effective no. 8, so a comparison with Cane as a 7 is largely usually based on some sort of generalised, historically based agenda which is actually very short on facts. Bar the end of year tour last year hes played one test at 7 since 2012- vs Argentina World cup- hows that for out of touch?

Folau has not been himself since at least prior to the world cup at test level. He struggled last year and is even firing blanks with the Waratahs, even their fans impatient with his inability to contribute the way he used to. Again, very out of touch, right now, hes struggling big time.

Smith is even within the last week playing at the top of his game. Sorry but Hogg I do not rate vs NZ. He's never done anything, and is likely going to be suspect on defence and shy on attack on this tour.

The Lions midfield wont be better than ours but I agree ours isnt as good as a couple of years ago, not to say it wont be, but I doubt SBW will be there. He's never made the frontline even at peak fitness and is average so far with the Blues after 3 matches.

Like I said I don't know re Props but I havent heard theword weak being descriptive of an AB front row for some years, but, happy to be wrong there.

I don't know why Read is often so underated when except for a period where concussion was clearly affecting his game, accuracy etc hes been the best around. AB's wouldnt have an 8 like Vunipola because hes very limited. Largely a bash em up no. 8 and very good at it where we want lineout skills- Reads the best loosie around there, speed, handling, and he does his fair share in the tight work. He's injured so time isnt on his side. Vunipola suits the England game but not the ABs.

Regarding individuals not making a team agree very much so there, and its probably the AB's who personify that better than anyone and probably why our individuals might perform better than their Lions equivalents, purely by having the collective talent around them. How many times do we hear 'who wouldnt play well in the AB's?'

Someone like Vunipola might even play better than Read in the AB's, but he isnt there, and Read is, making the chances of his being stronger more likely.

Taylorman the title of this thread is best Lions opposition team since 1989 but since you are not capable or willing to provide a team yourself i'm not sure why you feel qualified to comment on other people's who have?

As for your reasoning that a player would be stronger simply because he is in the ABs, thanks for reminding me again that there is no limit to kiwi arrogance.

Gwlad wrote:Taylorman the title of this thread i best since you are not capable or willing to provide a team yourself i'm not sure why you feel qualified to comment on other people's who have.

As for your reasoning that a player would be stronger simply because he is in the ABs, thanks for reminding me again that there is no limit to kiwi arrogance.

Gwlad,
Article does not list a requirement to list a team of any sort. It has a title, and its only content is a team list, so if that was your intention, perhaps you are not qualified to write such an article because if thats your expectation then it is poorly written, lazy, lacks any sort of instruction, context, and assumes a certain amount of guesswork on behalf of its audience.

In fact I'm surprised articles like this arent vetted for their quality.

To then set rules where there were previously none suggests ill preparation for what you expected as commentary, and I'd suggest that commenting on others teams without having first creating a list of your own should be allowed, but if not you should state that initially.

Besides, some of the teams listed you simply take smart alec pot shots at anyway, with no mature dialogue, just childish rhetoric.

Perhaps you should try again.

Taylorman wrote:

Gwlad wrote:Taylorman the title of this thread i best since you are not capable or willing to provide a team yourself i'm not sure why you feel qualified to comment on other people's who have.

As for your reasoning that a player would be stronger simply because he is in the ABs, thanks for reminding me again that there is no limit to kiwi arrogance.

Gwlad,
Article does not list a requirement to list a team of any sort. It has a title, and its only content is a team list, so if that was your intention, perhaps you are not qualified to write such an article because if thats your expectation then it is poorly written, lazy, lacks any sort of instruction, context, and assumes a certain amount of guesswork on behalf of its audience.

In fact I'm surprised articles like this arent vetted for their quality.

To then set rules where there were previously none suggests ill preparation for what you expected as commentary, and I'd suggest that commenting on others teams without having first creating a list of your own should be allowed, but if not you should state that initially.

Besides, some of the teams listed you simply take smart alec pot shots at anyway, with no mature dialogue, just childish rhetoric.

Perhaps you should try again.

Its not an 'article'. Stop obfuscating……its amazing how other posters managed to get a clue and list a team, you comment on those teams but can't be bothered to submit your own. Even one of your country men put one on although another responded as predicted. I shouldn't be surprised in your case i agree

But since I need to spell it out yet again…i have done repeatedly but you've chosen to ignore, list your team!

Gwlad wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Gwlad wrote:Taylorman the title of this thread i best since you are not capable or willing to provide a team yourself i'm not sure why you feel qualified to comment on other people's who have.

As for your reasoning that a player would be stronger simply because he is in the ABs, thanks for reminding me again that there is no limit to kiwi arrogance.

Gwlad,
Article does not list a requirement to list a team of any sort. It has a title, and its only content is a team list, so if that was your intention, perhaps you are not qualified to write such an article because if thats your expectation then it is poorly written, lazy, lacks any sort of instruction, context, and assumes a certain amount of guesswork on behalf of its audience.

In fact I'm surprised articles like this arent vetted for their quality.

To then set rules where there were previously none suggests ill preparation for what you expected as commentary, and I'd suggest that commenting on others teams without having first creating a list of your own should be allowed, but if not you should state that initially.

Besides, some of the teams listed you simply take smart alec pot shots at anyway, with no mature dialogue, just childish rhetoric.

Perhaps you should try again.

Its not an 'article'. Stop obfuscating……its amazing how other posters managed to get a clue and list a team, you comment on those teams but can't be bothered to submit your own. Even one of your country men put one on although another responded as predicted. I shouldn't be surprised in your case i agree

But since I need to spell it out yet again…i have done repeatedly but you've chosen to ignore, list your team!

Now that youve asked so nicely...

Nooooooooo

Gwlad wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:Something like:
Muliaina.
Gear or Vaiga Tuigamala
Umaga
Mauger Or Frank Bunce
Sivivatu
Carter 
Kelliher

Forwards
Woodcock
Fitzpaztrick Or Mealamu
Hayman
Robin Brooke
Ali Williams
Collins Or Zinny
McCaw Or The Iceman.
So'olialo.

So plenty of room for your Southern Hemisphere brethren then

 If its good enough for the Lions to drown their team with Welshmen, then its only fair that the opposition can be full of Kiwis.

Gwlad wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Gwlad wrote:Taylorman the title of this thread i best since you are not capable or willing to provide a team yourself i'm not sure why you feel qualified to comment on other people's who have.

As for your reasoning that a player would be stronger simply because he is in the ABs, thanks for reminding me again that there is no limit to kiwi arrogance.

Gwlad,
Article does not list a requirement to list a team of any sort. It has a title, and its only content is a team list, so if that was your intention, perhaps you are not qualified to write such an article because if thats your expectation then it is poorly written, lazy, lacks any sort of instruction, context, and assumes a certain amount of guesswork on behalf of its audience.

In fact I'm surprised articles like this arent vetted for their quality.

To then set rules where there were previously none suggests ill preparation for what you expected as commentary, and I'd suggest that commenting on others teams without having first creating a list of your own should be allowed, but if not you should state that initially.

Besides, some of the teams listed you simply take smart alec pot shots at anyway, with no mature dialogue, just childish rhetoric.

Perhaps you should try again.

Its not an 'article'. Stop obfuscating……its amazing how other posters managed to get a clue and list a team, you comment on those teams but can't be bothered to submit your own. Even one of your country men put one on although another responded as predicted. I shouldn't be surprised in your case i agree

But since I need to spell it out yet again…i have done repeatedly but you've chosen to ignore, list your team!

 I always thought that purpose of the forum was to provide an opportunity for people to exchange opinion(s) on the subject of rugby Union.

Pocock may have 8 on his back but around the park he's a 7, always has been and he's much better than Cane.

Perhaps a different topic, but NZ do not have the best players in every position, despite what some think.

There is an assumption - embellished here by Tailorman - that the mere fact of putting on a black jersey makes them better.

Gwlad wrote:There is an assumption - embellished here by Tailorman - that the mere fact of putting on a black jersey makes them better.

Where have you been Sonny?
Thats not an assumption. Its a fact.
If thats not the case with Welsh players putting on the Welsh jersey, they shouldnt be putting it on.

Taylorman wrote:

Gwlad wrote:There is an assumption - embellished here by Tailorman - that the mere fact of putting on a black jersey makes them better.

Where have you been Sonny?
Thats not an assumption. Its a fact.
If thats not the case with Welsh players putting on the Welsh jersey, they shouldnt be putting it on.

Unless they have tummy ache

Gwlad wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Gwlad wrote:There is an assumption - embellished here by Tailorman - that the mere fact of putting on a black jersey makes them better.

Where have you been Sonny?
Thats not an assumption. Its a fact.
If thats not the case with Welsh players putting on the Welsh jersey, they shouldnt be putting it on.

Unless they have tummy ache

yes even then the opposition needed extra time- without a tummy ache. So yeah.

Mind you dont recall Wales that year. thumbsup:

pretty sure the Mighty ABs have used the 'we have sore tummies' excuse on more than 1 occasion. 95 I recall was one but can't recall the other. And then there is the ref is a cheat excuse 07. This year it will be the 'Its not fair, the lions are using PI players'

Gwlad wrote:pretty sure the Mighty ABs have used the 'we have sore tummies' excuse on more than 1 occasion. 95 I recall was one but can't recall the other. And then there is the ref is a cheat excuse 07. This year it will be the 'Its not fair, the lions are using PI players'

Amazing how in thirty years folks can only come up with the same lame two or three tests. For the Lions No we don't use excuses like that. That's purely a Gwlad invention based on fake news. But we'll file this one away for another day as well.

I guess thats because in all that time those are perhaps the most significant examples of a rugby team embarrassing themselves with demeaning excuses. And there isn't anything fake about it though your suggestion there is puts you squarely into the Trump category of people who don't like to admit the truth.

Imagine being trolled by a supporter of the '8th ranked' international team. It's ludicrous.

In line with the thread I`ll 2005 AB squad in toto then I`ll add a few
reality checks.Since 2000 NZ have played 216 losing just 28,lost only
4 or 5 since 2011 RWC.
Only 2 or more on the bounce was 2009,comments on players are laughable
Moody and Crocket would rate among worlds top 4 loose heads,Franks among
top 3 tight heads.
A fully fit Read without broken hand/thumb probably number one .Sam
Whitelock is the best 5 in world Rugby and an excellent leader,no side
has dominated the AB`s in the set piece.
They will win there own ball at Scrum /lineout and disrupt the other sides
when they can.
In most matches they get about 40 percent ball,kick more than most
sides.
Having said that no side is invincible,blaming Refs we`ve all done that
WALES 1978?
At least one Lions tour could have been won IF they`d played as a
TEAM.Without breaking up into ego trip cliques,perhaps the most
significant factor.
THE only Tour won in NZ the Coach wasn't a National one,beat them
up?smother them?
Some very good sides tried that,NZ are comfortable without the ball
there Defence is as good as there attack.
It is indeed a unique Honour to be a Lion many in the past made huge
sacrifices to be come one.BUT it is also an Honour to be an AB that
doesn't mean.
They are better than another sides players a lot of AB`s were mere
journey men but still part of a team.
If you look at the Crusaders during there glory years,a lot of there
players were average at best.BUT they made up a great team.
Lions will do well to lose the series 1-2,3 zip is more likely BUT
anything can happen

comments on players are laughable
Moody and Crocket would rate among worlds top 4 loose heads,Franks among
top 3 tight heads.

Not a chance of this Emack, it's a real area of weakness in an otherwise fantastic side.

TH - Furlong, Slimani, Cole, Nel, Herrera at least better than Franks, probably more.

LH - Now that's an easy one, Crockett is awful. Moody decent but numerous better. McGrath, Marler, Vuinipola, Baille, Evans, Beast, EBA, Sio, Poirot......etc etc

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

comments on players are laughable
Moody and Crocket would rate among worlds top 4 loose heads,Franks among
top 3 tight heads.

Not a chance of this Emack, it's a real area of weakness in an otherwise fantastic side.

TH - Furlong, Slimani, Cole, Nel, Herrera at least better than Franks, probably more.

LH - Now that's an easy one, Crockett is awful. Moody decent but numerous better. McGrath, Marler, Vuinipola, Baille, Evans, Beast, EBA, Sio, Poirot......etc etc

Gethin Jenkins still is better

With their inferior players the All Blacks are very lucky that Gethin Jenkins isnt on the Lions tour.

aucklandlaurie wrote:With their inferior players the All Blacks are very lucky that Gethin Jenkins isnt on the Lions tour.

You obviously make up for it other areas! I think the AB's have struggled for props since the days of Hayman and Woodcock(in his prime). Franks is great around the park but can certainly be got at in the scrum, it just depends if a team get that many chances to attack it. The less said about Crockett the better I think.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:With their inferior players the All Blacks are very lucky that Gethin Jenkins isnt on the Lions tour.

You obviously make up for it other areas! I think the AB's have struggled for props since the days of Hayman and Woodcock(in his prime). Franks is great around the park but can certainly be got at in the scrum, it just depends if a team get that many chances to attack it. The less said about Crockett the better I think.

 Makes you wonder what the Crusaders and All Blacks see in him.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:With their inferior players the All Blacks are very lucky that Gethin Jenkins isnt on the Lions tour.

You obviously make up for it other areas! I think the AB's have struggled for props since the days of Hayman and Woodcock(in his prime). Franks is great around the park but can certainly be got at in the scrum, it just depends if a team get that many chances to attack it. The less said about Crockett the better I think.

 Makes you wonder what the Crusaders and All Blacks see in him.

Exactly....lack of viable options I guess. Wasnt he the most penalised player in Super rugby a year or 2 a go?

It's a pity the lions aren't doing a "Best of the rest" warm up before heading out, then you'd be able to stick Roberts in there.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:With their inferior players the All Blacks are very lucky that Gethin Jenkins isnt on the Lions tour.

You obviously make up for it other areas! I think the AB's have struggled for props since the days of Hayman and Woodcock(in his prime). Franks is great around the park but can certainly be got at in the scrum, it just depends if a team get that many chances to attack it. The less said about Crockett the better I think.

 Makes you wonder what the Crusaders and All Blacks see in him.

Exactly....lack of viable options I guess. Wasnt he the most penalised player in Super rugby a year or 2 a go?

 I have never heard that before, but one record he does hold is  the most capped player in Super Rugby.

Again showing the lack of propping quality in NZ I guess

http://m.sport24.co.za/sport24/Columnists/TankLanning/Scrum-penalties-killing-rugby-20130418

2013, most penalised player in Super rugby. I was a few years off.