British & Irish Lions Squad 2017

First topic message reminder :

robbo277 wrote:
But as I said, I don't want players to water down their comments. I want to read what the players think, I don't want to read what the press officer tells them to say.

That's fair enough, and I agree with the rest of your comment on this basis. I personally don't particularly care what Mike Brown thinks, especially when it's as obvious as "experienced test player is disappointed to have not been selected for the Lions". I could have told you that without Mike Brown's public statement. The point where it deviated from him merely expressing his disappointment to one where he's put his foot in his mouth is the fact he questioned the coaches' lack of communication to him personally. Even if he's right- and I think he may well be- to publicly bring that into question in the way he has done is antithetical to the whole business of a squad as a unity, a whole above the self.

As for him being a liability, I agree to an extent, but equally he does get in his fair few verbal and physical scraps. He's clearly not a player who's particularly in control of his emotions, a bit like Biggar, in that he wants to plead his case long after it is obvious his efforts are utterly in vain. He's not a catastrophe by any means, but having played with people like him, they can be liabilities. Ticking time bomb may be the incorrect phrase, and overdoing it slightly, but that doesn't negate the point entirely. Either way, it doesn't particularly matter, as I don't think it really affects his performance or mentality, and the players around him, too much: but if it did, it's hard to quantify anyway.

RDW_Scotland wrote:WHY ARE WE STILL DISCUSSING THIS

Because we can (can).


So, which member of the squad has the best legs

RDW_Scotland wrote:WHY ARE WE STILL DISCUSSING THIS

Because if we don't we may have to focus on how depressingly uncompetitive the tour will be.

Funnily enough it's similar.

Gatland's top 8 is injured so he is considering using Stander as 8 cover.....

Similar to how Ireland have used Stander when Heaslip pulled out.

Scottrf he's not covering just as Daly isn't covering for England. No player covers for 2 years....

Schmidt picks it because it's the best he can.

Stander isn't at the back of the scrum, he doesn't wear 8.

Sgt Pooly

No you aren't getting it - I said Stander is not a specialist 8, he is at international level proven as a 6 who can cover 8 because 8 is his primary position at club level.

Not hard to understand -

Club level - primarily 8
International level - primarily 6.

This is where Stander has been used. You can say but POM the deity would be playing at 6 - he's not been playing at 6, it's been Stander. That's the reality. You can say but Stander wouldn't if POM was fit, hasn't happened.

It's about looking at the evidence. He is not a specialist 8 at international level. If Stander plays more games at 8 then his primary position might well change to 8.



It's disrespectful to say player X is covering if player X is playing really well. I didn't think Launchbury or Lawes were covering Kruis, they played well for England on merit.

Not merely cover. Same with Stander.

To come back to the original point then we still have 2 specialist 8s in faletau and moriarty.

Scottrf he's not covering just as Daly isn't covering for England. No player covers for 2 years....

And by your very own tbeory.....Farrell is not a specialist Int 10 as he's hardly played there for 2 years.

There is zero point debating with you BS as you are so inconsistant and just twist your own opinions to try and back your ideology up.

You don't make any sense.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:He is a bit of a strange choice for the Lions.

I think this is accurate, I didn't have him in my squad before the announcement, but Gatland has seen something he likes. He fits Gatland's template, and if he has a couple of good tour games I think he wouldn't hesitate to pick him for the first test.

Itoje needs to be careful, 2 more games at flank for England and he's no longer a lock. Might struggle to break into the Sarries team then.

Scottrf Itoje is still a lock because most of his international games have been at lock....

It's not difficult to understand but somehow you cannot accept it.

I think Itoje has proven so far he's not particularly comfortable at 6.

Sgt Pooly Farrell still has all that gametime at 10 under his belt. It's not something he's lost.

How I am inconsistent? You are just having difficulty understanding the bleeding obvious.

Farrell has played many games at international level at 10 - something you keep ignoring.

I use evidence to support my arguments. You don't.

I don't need to twist my opinions because I've stuck to the same argument.

You keep trying to come up with examples which I keep destroying again and again.

Some things are debatable. Some are not.

Moriarty is a specialist 8 to go with faletau so we have cover there.

Beshocked, you can twist it any which way but it still results in you being wrong.

Its very hard to imagine what the back line will be like but I can imagine that Gatland will try to go the bosh route (with an element of familiarity in players) so I think his back line would look like this :

09 : Webb (Murray if Sexton starts)
10 : Farrell
11 : Halfpenny
12 : Henshaw
13 : Davies
14 : Liam Williams
15 : Hogg

Now in fairness, I do not think that is a bad back line but I would like to get Nowell in there instead of Halfpenny.

beshocked wrote:Scottrf Itoje is still a lock because most of his international games have been at lock....

It's not difficult to understand but somehow you cannot accept it.

That's why I said two more games. And that was being generous. 5 starts and 1 sub as a flanker, 6 starts as a lock. So one more game and he becomes a flanker at international level.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Moriarty is a specialist 8 to go with faletau so we have cover there.

Are you kidding? He's a 6.

Scottrf wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Moriarty is a specialist 8 to go with faletau so we have cover there.

Are you kidding? He's a 6.

It's Beshocked logic, he plays at 8 for Wales so that must be what he is.

eirebilly wrote:Its very hard to imagine what the back line will be like but I can imagine that Gatland will try to go the bosh route (with an element of familiarity in players) so I think his back line would look like this :

09 : Webb (Murray if Sexton starts)
10 : Farrell
11 : Halfpenny
12 : Henshaw
13 : Davies
14 : Liam Williams
15 : Hogg

Now in fairness, I do not think that is a bad back line but I would like to get Nowell in there instead of Halfpenny.

I cannot see Gats selecting a team without North in it.

I don't believe Farrell isn't an Int 10, I'm using your bizarre logic to try and show you how incorrect you are.

As Scott says, a few more games and Itoje becomes a 6! Who'd have thought...

LondonTiger wrote:OK, trying to get this right in my head.

Stander is a specialist 8 being played out of position by Schmidt at 6.
Haskell is a specialist 6 being played out of position by Jones at 7.
Moriarty is a specialist 6 being played out of position by Howley at 8.
Warburton is a specialist 7 being played out of position by Howley at 6.
Itoje is a specialist 4 being played out of position by Jones at 6.
Henderson is a specialist something, being played out of position somewhere by someone.
SOB is a non-specialist back-rower, being played wherever he wants.
Mako is a specialist centre being played out of position at 1.
Sinckler is a specialist 10 being played out of position at 3.

Daly is a specialist 13 being played out of position by Jones at 11.
Williams is a specialist 15 being played out of position by Howley at 11.
Payne is a specialist 15 being played out of position by Schmidt at 13.
Hogg is a ... nah giving up now.

Thought I would repost this simple guide.

Wouldn't Liam Williams bench be a good option, with North 11 Nowell 14? Then covers full back too.

Nowell is the form winger of those picked IMO.

The Great Aukster wrote:Billy V being out is a blow? Really? The truth is he's not in the same league as Read [...]

It seems you haven't quite grasped the gravity of the situation that is the Lions touring NZ...the Lions can only select the best from what they have, and Billy Vunipola is very much the best at what he does available for selection.

miaow wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:Billy V being out is a blow? Really? The truth is he's not in the same league as Read [...]

It seems you haven't quite grasped the gravity of the situation that is the Lions touring NZ...the Lions can only select the best from what they have, and Billy Vunipola is very much the best at what he does available for selection.

Just boring NZ arrogance/trolling.

You think you have a good player? Wouldn't get in the second team for a super rugby side.

Yes I'm kidding scott. Moriarty does seem the perfect example on reflection though.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Beshocked, you can twist it any which way but it still results in you being wrong.

 I am not wrong. It's not me ignoring that the fact that almost all of Stander's caps have been as a 6.

Sgt Pooly



A player can play in more than 1 position, hard as that is for you to understand.

Farrell is a 10/12 at international level. He's sufficiently experienced in both positions.

Still doesn't make Stander a specialist 8 at international level though. If you look back to the beginning of the argument this is what my whole argument has been based on.

Definition of specialist - https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/specialist

By the definition - Stander is not a specialist no 8 at international level.

Most of his caps have been at 6 so he's clearly not a specialist no 8 no matter how much you can tell yourself you are right.

You are wrong. Stop ignoring the evidence.

Londontiger most of your examples are stupid and inaccurate. Disappointed in you.

Putting some idiotic examples based on no evidence proves nothing.

Robbo yes that makes sense.

THERE IS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO CONCLUDE THAT CJ STANDER HAS BEEN A SUCCESSFUL 8 AT INTERNATIONAL LEVEL. HE HASN'T REALLY BEEN GIVEN A GO THERE.

HOWEVER, AS PAST PERFORMANCES DO NOT GUARANTEE FUTURE SUCCESS, IT ISN'T NECESSARY TO HAVE A TRACK RECORD OF SUCCESS TO BE SUCCESSFUL IN THE FUTURE.

THERE IS ENOUGH EVIDENCE CONSIDERING HIS STYLE OF PLAY, HIS SUCCESS AS A BLINDSIDE FLANKER AT INTERNTAIONAL LEVEL AND HIS BODY OF WORK AT 8 FOR HIS CLUB TO CONCLUDE THAT HE HAS A DECENT CHANCE OF BEING SUCCESSFUL AT 8 AT INTERNATIONAL LEVEL IN THE FUTURE, BOTH FOR THE LIONS AND FOR IRELAND IN THEIR POST-HEASLIP WORLD.

IN ABSENCE OF BILLY VUNIPOLA, STANDER IS THE BEST OPTION AVAILABLE FOR THE 8 SHIRT ALONGSIDE FALETAU, AHEAD OF HEASLIP, HUGHES AND STRAUSS.

End. Let's move on.

GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH.

This has gone round in circles more times than the London Eye with the same argument happening over and over and over and over again - can we please drop this and move on? I'll end up locking the thread if this carries on because it really is getting silly now.

There's an article in the Western mail online about the NZ press reaction to Billy V being out of the tour, apparently, now he's not coming, he is the player they were scared of, the Lions don't have a chance now, etc etc.

Scottrf wrote:

miaow wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:Billy V being out is a blow? Really? The truth is he's not in the same league as Read [...]

It seems you haven't quite grasped the gravity of the situation that is the Lions touring NZ...the Lions can only select the best from what they have, and Billy Vunipola is very much the best at what he does available for selection.

Just boring NZ arrogance/trolling.

You think you have a good player? Wouldn't get in the second team for a super rugby side.

Erm Aukster's Irish not Kiwi. So it can't be "NZ" arrogance ...

I'd quite happily move Read to 6 to accommodate Billy V at the Crusaders.

RDW_Scotland wrote:GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH.

This has gone round in circles more times than the London Eye with the same argument happening over and over and over and over again - can we please drop this and move on? I'll end up locking the thread if this carries on because it really is getting silly now.

I did try and head it off early, I'll try harder next time

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:Erm Aukster's Irish not Kiwi. So it can't be "NZ" arrogance ...

I'd quite happily move Read to 6 to accommodate Billy V at the Crusaders.

Fair enough, my apologies

Scottrf wrote:

miaow wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:Billy V being out is a blow? Really? The truth is he's not in the same league as Read [...]

It seems you haven't quite grasped the gravity of the situation that is the Lions touring NZ...the Lions can only select the best from what they have, and Billy Vunipola is very much the best at what he does available for selection.

Just boring NZ arrogance/trolling.

You think you have a good player? Wouldn't get in the second team for a super rugby side.

I thought he was Irish, and hostile to the concept of the Lions?

Generally speaking, whilst I wouldn't go as far as to say that the Lions players aren't in the same "league" as the All Blacks, almost to a man they're not as good. That's where tactics and accuracy/efficiency and being able to control the game to your own strengths comes in- and B Vunipola could have been a massive strength, a point of difference for the Lions in getting crucial momentum, from which everything else follows.

Scottrf wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:Erm Aukster's Irish not Kiwi. So it can't be "NZ" arrogance ...

I'd quite happily move Read to 6 to accommodate Billy V at the Crusaders.

Fair enough, my apologies

For NZ it'd be a question of how best to balance the back row, trading off Billy's carrying up the middle vs Read's line-out option/tram-line running etc - a fit Kaino or Luatua at 6 helps with the lineout, a Squire a 6 less so etc etc.

Robbo that's the most reasonable and sensible response I've seen.

Likes of Londontiger,Sgt Pooly and no 7 & 1/2 should learn from you.

I absolutely agree. We'll see whether the Lions can do sufficiently well without Billy, whoever it is.

Backrow balance can be complicated and yes players have different styles.

Poor form beshocked. You're ignoring the other specialised 8 in the squad ie moriarty.

LondonTiger wrote:

eirebilly wrote:Its very hard to imagine what the back line will be like but I can imagine that Gatland will try to go the bosh route (with an element of familiarity in players) so I think his back line would look like this :

09 : Webb (Murray if Sexton starts)
10 : Farrell
11 : Halfpenny
12 : Henshaw
13 : Davies
14 : Liam Williams
15 : Hogg

Now in fairness, I do not think that is a bad back line but I would like to get Nowell in there instead of Halfpenny.

I cannot see Gats selecting a team without North in it.

Fair point, then it be more likely to see North in for Williams or Williams/Halfpenny to go to 15 and Hogg missing out. for the record, I would like the backline to look like this.

09 : Murray/Webb (not too concerned who)
10 : Sexton
11 : Nowell
12 : Farrell
13 : JJ (Davies or Henshaw would do very well here too)
14 : Williams
15 : Hogg

To me, this back line gives a better balance and with Farrell at 12, second play maker and on field back up to Sexton (good for interchange tactics)

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

miaow wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:Billy V being out is a blow? Really? The truth is he's not in the same league as Read [...]

It seems you haven't quite grasped the gravity of the situation that is the Lions touring NZ...the Lions can only select the best from what they have, and Billy Vunipola is very much the best at what he does available for selection.

Just boring NZ arrogance/trolling.

You think you have a good player? Wouldn't get in the second team for a super rugby side.

Erm Aukster's Irish not Kiwi. So it can't be "NZ" arrogance ...

I'd quite happily move Read to 6 to accommodate Billy V at the Crusaders.

Read started at 6 if I recall right, I always thought he'd end up back there tbh.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Poor form beshocked. You're ignoring the other specialised 8 in the squad ie moriarty.

Moriarty isn't actually any good though. I don't know the break down of his caps but it doesn't matter. Overrated in all positions.

I am sure Stander would be a superior 8 to Moriarty and he's most definitely a better 6.

I still think Moriarty is a waste of a Lions spot.

he's just not good enough and he'd be destroyed by Read IMO.

I most definitely wouldn't want him at 8 for the Lions.

Moriarty isn't the no 8 benchmark though.

But moriarty is proven at 8. To be fair while he was on the pitch vs england he was very good. Whether you rate him or not though and it's fair enough not to he is a specialised 8 which the lions have access to.

no 7 & 1/2

Look perhaps I've focused too much time on whether player X is a specialist or not.

I do think the term specialist is pretty clear but obviously not to some.

Moriarty might be proven at 8 but where would you rate him compared to other no 8s in the NH? I'd put him near the bottom.

Even though I've made it clear I don't think Stander is a specialist no 8 at international level, I do believe he is a superior rugby player and would be superior no 8 to Moriarty despite being unproven in that position at international level.

I've said it before I don't know what Moriarty is doing in the Lions squad.

A makeshift backrow of Itoje,Clifford Hughes is not the same as NZ backrow.

No I get your point beshocked. Just throwing out there that moriarty is apparently a specialist number 8. I don't think either of use rates him as an 8, probably both really think hes a 6 who was covering but there we go. So the overall point is everyone thinks Stander is a serious option at 8, probably will or should challenge faletau for that starting position. Fair enough I think.

Look perhaps I've focused too much time on whether player X is a specialist or not.

You think?

I'm not seeing that at all over the last 3 pages.......

No 7 & 1/2

Being a specialist doesn't necessarily make you better. Daly is playing wing for England and he's keeping out players who only play on the wing.

Daly I would say is a superior winger to Yarde and May despite him not playing that position at club level.

Stander according to some isn't a 6 but has been holding down the 6 position for Ireland for some time.

Some players are versatile.

Yes. We're there.

Flip sake, my post was entirely facetious and not to be taken seriously. Sigh.

Vunipola is IMO a huge loss. Beyond his carrying, his workrate is terrific for such a big guy (check how much work him and Mako got through against Exeter, it really is rather amazing), and he has great hands. I think this means Stander has to figure now, either at 6 or 8. Personally I'd go with POM, Warbs, Stander as a backrow assuming all are fit, with Stander, Warbs, Faletau another possibility. Assuming all fit and firing, obviously. I wonder whether this makes a case for bringing a big carrier into the pack somewhere else, say Mako or George in the front row?

eirebilly wrote:That is a nice balance rapid but I honestly believe Gatland will pick the following.

06 : Warburton
07 : Tipuric
08 : Faletau

POM on the bench.

Not a bad selection and it will do its job.

Not sure why you think that? On form Stander has to be in there and Gatland has picked the form players. It's possible the back-row you think he'll select will feature at some point, perhaps during a mid-week game. If their form is good then they may feature in one test as was the case in the 2013 tour where everyone got the chance to play in the tests. The one I quite like is:
6. O'Brien
7. Warburton
8. Stander

POM/Haskell on the bench.

Allegedly, Sam Warbuton smells faintly of ranch dressing*. Discuss.

* I am referring to a general light vinegaratte - the source did not provide further details.

I think this chat about specialists has been just... totally fascinating.

One issue I don't think has been adequately discussed is which of these is the world's greatest Welshman:

Alun-Wyn Jones	Tom Jones	Alan Jones	Grace Jones	Samantha Jones

Discuss.

George Carlin wrote:Allegedly, Sam Warbuton smells faintly of ranch dressing*. Discuss.

* I am referring to a general light vinegaratte - the source did not provide further details.

That just the aftershave Gatland likes him to wear when they spoon at night

I'd like everyone's input on whether Sean Lamont was a specialist wing or if he was actually a 6 masquerading as a winger!

IanBru wrote:I think this chat about specialists has been just... totally fascinating.

One issue I don't think has been adequately discussed is which of these is the world's greatest Welshman:

Alun-Wyn Jones

Tom Jones

Alan Jones

Grace Jones

Samantha Jones

Discuss.

I always suspected that Grace Jones had a Winkle. Never realised the same could be said of Kim Cattrall though.

tigertattie wrote:I'd like everyone's input on whether Sean Lamont was a specialist wing or if he was actually a 6 masquerading as a winger!

High class gigolo, with rugby just a hobby.