Best Lions opposition team since 1989.

First topic message reminder :

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

The Bulls is not the Lions to be fair, it's a complete different ball game.

If you mean Faddes, he's not really NZ quality, too poor in defence.

Yes Alan at Super level NZ sides are demolishing the overseas ones. Now 17-0 against oz sides and it's possible they'll go all 23 now. Against all foreign sides they're 30 wins from 31 matches at 41-18, six tries to two.

So in terms of Super rugby it's never been as strong as this year and in terms of home wins, 45 and counting since 2009, ABs heve never had a better record coming into this home series.

Simply put, certainly at home our players are all very used to winning, and scoring tries. How that translates to a series result I don't know but it does suggest it's going to take something special to win this series.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:The Bulls is not the Lions to be fair, it's a complete different ball game.

If you mean Faddes, he's not really NZ quality, too poor in defence.

No,but it is a sign of the dominance they are having over foreign sides in general. I doubt there'd be five NH sides that would win the 30 matches our five have so far. It's never been as convincing as it is this year. Yes it's reflected by relative weaker opposition and part of that is the devouring of Super rugby by NH sides, particularly NZ and SA players.

Faddes has some very good skills on attack and is good Super rugby stock, typical of many Super level players, but no he's not in the AB sights and probably never will be.

The strength of the NZ sides, including the ABs is the ability to play as teams, play to a gameplan, and play through to the 80, and that's the main difference between that and the Lions, who have yet to play as one. That is the Lions biggest Archilles heel, always has been. They'll need time to gel, and with this itinerary, they won't get it.

Taylorman wrote:Yes Alan at Super level NZ sides are demolishing the overseas ones. Now 17-0 against oz sides and it's possible they'll go all 23 now. Against all foreign sides they're 30 wins from 31 matches at 41-18, six tries to two.

So in terms of Super rugby it's never been as strong as this year and in terms of home wins, 45 and counting since 2009, ABs heve never had a better record coming into this home series.

Simply put, certainly at home our players are all very used to winning, and scoring tries. How that translates to a series result I don't know but it does suggest it's going to take something special to win this series.

Gavin Henson reckons we'll batter you though, good enough for me. To quote the great Scott Johnson (who narrowly missed out on the Head coach gig) "Statistics are like a bikini, it shows a lot but not the whole thing and if you go back in time, the stats may be lying". And for a point of comparison in the Pro12 Scottish, Welsh and Irish teams have only lost 6 times to overseas opposition, and only once at home.
Even more impressively in the Aviva Premiership the English are unbeaten against overseas opposition. England, Ireland and Scotland are both unbeaten at home this calendar year, Wales have only lost once. The British and Irish Lions have a World Ranking score of 373.73, New Zealand have a paltry 94.78.

You're not the only one with statistics.

Taylorman thinks Super rugby means they re Superheroes like him (Tumbleweedman) but how many of these 'Super' rugby sides have played the Lions? Their record is totally irrelevant but because it infers some sort of Super superiority he loves throwing the stats around.

Gwlad wrote:Taylorman thinks Super rugby means they re Superheroes like him (Tumbleweedman) but how many of these 'Super' rugby sides have played the Lions? Their record is totally irrelevant but because it infers some sort of Super superiority he loves throwing the stats around.

You make a good point, the Lions are unbeaten in nearly four years. Have never lost to a New Zealand Super Rugby side, nor the South African Super Rugby sides. Haven't lost a game in New Zealand in over a decade and not a single member of the New Zealand squad has experience beating them.

Taylorman wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:The Bulls is not the Lions to be fair, it's a complete different ball game.

If you mean Faddes, he's not really NZ quality, too poor in defence.

No,but it is a sign of the dominance they are having over foreign sides in general. I doubt there'd be five NH sides that would win the 30 matches our five have so far. It's never been as convincing as it is this year. Yes it's reflected by relative weaker opposition and part of that is the devouring of Super rugby by NH sides, particularly NZ and SA players.

Faddes has some very good skills on attack and is good Super rugby stock, typical of many Super level players, but no he's not in the AB sights and probably never will be.

The strength of the NZ sides, including the ABs is the ability to play as teams, play to a gameplan, and play through to the 80, and that's the main difference between that and the Lions, who have yet to play as one. That is the Lions biggest Archilles heel, always has been. They'll need time to gel, and with this itinerary, they won't get it.

Hard to call Taylor and obviously hypothetical.

Id take Saracens to beat every non NZ side with relitive ease. Id also fancy Leinster, Munster, Wasps, Clermont and Toulon to beat most if not all.

Saracens v Highlanders/Canes would be a real treat, completley contrasting styles.

Stats mean nothing correct,BUT no Lions side since 2009 faced full
strength non-test teams to there shame.Hiding players to escape
injuries this time its likely to be full strength sides.ASK Lions sides
that faced full strength provincial sides mid week pre Test to know.
Face it a full strength many ITM or Currie Cup sides would match
Premiership.Pro 12 or Top14 sides.
Try Saracens versus Canterbury at full strength that would be a match
to savour.
NO touring side since 1971-2 Nz has been a 15 a side thing,since injury
replacement.NZ`s worst team ever by result but were still unbeaten
in tests by UK and Ireland .
Famous for the Munster result among others.

Gwlad wrote:Taylorman thinks Super rugby means they re Superheroes like him (Tumbleweedman) but how many of these 'Super' rugby sides have played the Lions? Their record is totally irrelevant but because it infers some sort of Super superiority he loves throwing the stats around.

That's true, ignorance is bliss, though many of this Lions squad has lost to the ABs, there's probably well over 100 test losses in the squad combined, add another ten for Gatland. Dismiss Super rugby if you wish but it represents the feeder system to the ABs and at the moment.

Totally irrelevant? Somehow I doubt that's the case. These are just the only available stats, no more no less, take them as you will.

But as usual, very good analysis Gwlad. It's amazing how many words you can use to actually communicate nothing at all.

I highly doubt the Lions will win a test tbh

Try Crusaders at full strength v Saracens currently and wouldn't back
any of the others against them either.Like playing Barbarians sides
there`s so many overseas players.

emack2 wrote:Try Crusaders at full strength v Saracens currently and wouldn't back
any of the others against them either.Like playing Barbarians sides
there`s so many overseas players.

What exactly does that mean?

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:The Bulls is not the Lions to be fair, it's a complete different ball game.

If you mean Faddes, he's not really NZ quality, too poor in defence.

No,but it is a sign of the dominance they are having over foreign sides in general. I doubt there'd be five NH sides that would win the 30 matches our five have so far. It's never been as convincing as it is this year. Yes it's reflected by relative weaker opposition and part of that is the devouring of Super rugby by NH sides, particularly NZ and SA players.

Faddes has some very good skills on attack and is good Super rugby stock, typical of many Super level players, but no he's not in the AB sights and probably never will be.

The strength of the NZ sides, including the ABs is the ability to play as teams, play to a gameplan, and play through to the 80, and that's the main difference between that and the Lions, who have yet to play as one. That is the Lions biggest Archilles heel, always has been. They'll need time to gel, and with this itinerary, they won't get it.

Hard to call Taylor and obviously hypothetical.

Id take Saracens to beat every non NZ side with relitive ease. Id also fancy Leinster, Munster, Wasps, Clermont and Toulon to beat most if not all.

Saracens v Highlanders/Canes would be a real treat, completley contrasting styles.

Yes very hypothetical, though that's still a sweeping statement as well. Six sides to go unbeaten against the best of the SA and Oz sides over 30 matches. Somehow I doubt that. And without their foreign players, no chance.

Anyway, it's all hypothetical as you say,Super Rugby is all we have to go on at the moment.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I highly doubt the Lions will win a test tbh

Still hard to say, I think the first test is winnable, ABs don't usually get their combos right first test as England showed a few years ago, they should have taken test one. Injuries are key, and we have many, and so is the weather. We had such a crapz summer I wouldn't surprise if winters just as bad.

Key for us is getting started early and if they can bring even some of the Super form to the tests then we'll be ok, but that will also depend on the amount of pressure the Lions can apply early on.

Work it out all these crap SH players who every AI`s have NH vultures
hanging around.
Franks,Read,Whitelock,Todd,Ben Smith,Aron Smith,Fekitoa,Dagg all
targeted stayed loyal.
Luatua,Faumina,Kerr-Barlow,Cruden,Lowe didn't,Barretts both will
be targeted.NH money wins again Club before Country unless you can
re-cycle.
Why are SA and Australia currently weak?look at your top NH sides
how many Boks and Wallabies playing in NH.
Club release uncertain get a well known player make a name and the
cheque books out.
France Top14 some of the best in the world clubs with until recently
40% France qualified,with manic owners chasing them.
IF NZ allowed overseas based players to continue to be AB`s they`d
soon become weak to.
How many Crusaders players has Blackadder poached for his side?

Well thats an issue with the individual countries more than the NH sides. If SA and Aus paid more I imagine players would stay.

Yeah we tend to celebrate when guys like Retallick re-sign till 2020 or whatever it is.

This is another reason the ABs and kiwis will want to make sure the Lions get beaten. Any ABs even thinking of going north will want a Lions scalp on their resume.

And those that don't want to go will be sick of seeing their mates leave because the money takes them to where they wouldn't normally choose to live or play.

The rift is definitely there I agree. It has nothing to do with those that will be touring than what they represent.

On one hand it's great that our players get better futures at a financial level and perhaps it's our fault in some way we can't pay our players more but the simple fact is our players are leaving in droves and we miss seeing them play for our teams.

Sure I read in ghe nz herald that nz are doing really well from super rugby tv money? Most money going to development and top players rather than those in the nz side/fringes?

I can imagine Taylor, it must be infuriating. Although, I'll always remember watching Carl Hayman up at Falcons destroying opposition LH's.

I suppose in other respects it probably helps to keep the production line fresh, if you look at the Northern Hemisphere professional teams many of them are full of players no longer available/ good enough whereas in New Zealand as soon as a player is not getting picked for the international side or at least realises he won't be in contention by the next Lions tour or World Cup he tends to head off to chase the money. If you look at the Saracens team that's in the Champions Cup final and in the Aviva Premiership Jim Hamilton and Kelly Brown will probably both be in and around the squad. That's two guys who were deemed not good enough for Scotland 2-3 years ago and they still play a very active role in Europe's, arguably, premier club rugby team

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I can imagine Taylor, it must be infuriating. Although, I'll always remember watching Carl Hayman up at Falcons destroying opposition LH's.

I know, imagine if you had Farrell, Launchberry, Sexton, Murray and 20 other current test or fringe players all currently playing for the Chiefs and Highlanders, not being available for 6N and a few of your successful under 20's all here biding time before they can be All Blacks.

That's what Oz, NZ and SA are all dealing with at the moment, it's hit or miss whether we get to even see them.

Then we get told the gap is closing! NH rugby is just as strong as SH! Not only can we not pick our own players from NH clubs, many of them are there to sit the residence out. Teo, Payne and many before them already there, Woodward over there now, and players like Hayman and Piutau...certain ABs, gone at their peak.

We are lucky our production line can absorb all this...so far. But Oz and SA can't, and we may not last much longer, Piutau really setting a precedent where it's mostly those at the end of their careers or not quite good enough for the ABs that go over. Piutau has now opened the door for young aspiring ABs to go.

I'll be gutted if any of the Ioane brothers, Jordie Barrett, McKenzie and several others like them were to go simply because they don't make the Lions series. One or two million for a 20 year old must be an unbelievable temptation, the effort required to play NH club rugby far less than trying to crack the ABs.

123456789 wrote:

Gwlad wrote:Taylorman thinks Super rugby means they re Superheroes like him (Tumbleweedman) but how many of these 'Super' rugby sides have played the Lions? Their record is totally irrelevant but because it infers some sort of Super superiority he loves throwing the stats around.

You make a good point, the Lions are unbeaten in nearly four years. Have never lost to a New Zealand Super Rugby side, nor the South African Super Rugby sides. Haven't lost a game in New Zealand in over a decade and not a single member of the New Zealand squad has experience beating them.

Super!!!!

GWlad what about the down side ,where teams like Cardiff,Newport,Swansea,
Newport,Munster,several County Groupings can boast of beating an AB side.
Only 8 NH wins in the pro era,France 4 [2],England 3[1] and Ireland in that
time only 3 away.

Taylorman wrote:...Targeting the All Black scrum is easier said than done...

I'm agreeing with you, T-man.

We were supposed to have scrum dominance over Australia in 2013 but it only really materialized when Corbisiero turned up to partner Jones. It's not an advantage the Lions had throughout the tour, and that was under the old scrummaging laws against the Wallaby scrum. Just don't think we'll get much change from targeting the scrum in NZ. NZ just aren't particularly vulnerable there.

Our best bet is probably to try and do what you describe NZ doing to the Lions. You see NZ running the Lions off their feet, and reducing any scrum power. We would hope to give your forwards a tough time on scrums, mauls etc to reduce their effectiveness in open play.

Rugby Fan wrote:

Taylorman wrote:...Targeting the All Black scrum is easier said than done...

I'm agreeing with you, T-man.

We were supposed to have scrum dominance over Australia in 2013 but it only really materialized when Corbisiero turned up to partner Jones. It's not an advantage the Lions had throughout the tour, and that was under the old scrummaging laws against the Wallaby scrum. Just don't think we'll get much change from targeting the scrum in NZ. NZ just aren't particularly vulnerable there.

Our best bet is probably to try and do what you describe NZ doing to the Lions. You see NZ running the Lions off their feet, and reducing any scrum power. We would hope to give your forwards a tough time on scrums, mauls etc to reduce their effectiveness in open play.

Yes, keep them close, keep them busy, tighten it all up, then perhaps time your wide attacks less often but pick them well. Thats what I'm expecting Gatland to do, and he'll use Farrell for that. That wll drag the ABs into that game if its done effectively so theyll be desperately trying to move the ball around. Knocking them over as Ireland did will frustrate them...its just a huge ask to get on top of them that way, especially if they capitalise on the times they do get it wide.

Taylorman wrote:...its just a huge ask to get on top of them that way, especially if they capitalise on the times they do get it wide.

That's what I fear. Few of the Lions have experienced beating New Zealand, and none of them has done so by overhauling a deficit. England always led in 2012and, while NZ may have scored first against Ireland in Chicago, the Irish were in front by the 10th minute and stayed there. A couple of quick scores for the All Blacks could easily cause the doubt to creep in.

Rugby Fan wrote:

Taylorman wrote:...its just a huge ask to get on top of them that way, especially if they capitalise on the times they do get it wide.

That's what I fear. Few of the Lions have experienced beating New Zealand, and none of them has done so by overhauling a deficit. England always led in 2012and, while NZ may have scored first against Ireland in Chicago, the Irish were in front by the 10th minute and stayed there. A couple of quick scores for the All Blacks could easily cause the doubt to creep in.

what is the relevance of a solitary win 5 years ago when he ABs were having a collective runny tummy?

And I just love the weak knees being shown by almost everyone on here.

Its the Lions!! They have to go out their to tear some throats out otherwise why bother at all?

Gwlad wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

Taylorman wrote:...its just a huge ask to get on top of them that way, especially if they capitalise on the times they do get it wide.

That's what I fear. Few of the Lions have experienced beating New Zealand, and none of them has done so by overhauling a deficit. England always led in 2012and, while NZ may have scored first against Ireland in Chicago, the Irish were in front by the 10th minute and stayed there. A couple of quick scores for the All Blacks could easily cause the doubt to creep in.

what is the relevance of a solitary win 5 years ago when he ABs were having a collective runny tummy?

And I just love the weak knees being shown by almost everyone on here.

Its the Lions!! They have to go out their to tear some throats out otherwise why bother at all?

Exactly, they didn't bother last find they were here.