Lions 2017 - the decider

by **RDW** Wed May 31, 2017 9:03 am

First topic message reminder :

Lions 2017 - the decider - Page 20 R2fRSPlg

After months if not years, of debate, arguments and plenty bickering the time has come - The Lions are in New Zealand and the tour has begun!

I think it is fair to say that if you're not a fan of the concept of the Lions then this isn't the thread to bring it up - we have had plenty of that over several months and the debate has been done to death. This thread will hopefully be a positive place where those excited about the tour (like me!) can talk about everything that's going on. That's until Jamie Roberts gets a callup of course... Run

3 June - Provincial union team (Toll Stadium, Whangarei)

7 June - Blues (Eden Park, Auckland)

10 June - Crusaders (AMI Stadium, Christchurch)

13 June - Highlanders (Forsyth Barr Stadium, Dunedin)

17 June - Maori (International Stadium, Rotorua)

20 June - Chiefs (Waikato Stadium, Hamilton)

24 June - New Zealand (First Test, Eden Park, Auckland)

27 June - Hurricanes (Westpac Stadium, Wellington)

1 July - New Zealand (Second Test, Westpac Stadium, Wellington)

8 July - New Zealand (Third Test, Eden Park, Auckland)

Lions 2017 - the decider - Page 20 Lions20131024x768_2947826

Lions 2017 - the decider - Page 20 Lions20131024x768_2947826

by No 7&1/2 Mon Jul 10, 2017 3:33 pm

In regards hating gatland as he's a winner ...doesn't fit here as 1 he didn't win and 2 the lions is our team and the example of hating man u as a rival doesn't really work.

by beshocked Mon Jul 10, 2017 3:34 pm

I know that's sarcasm but obviously Murray can't celebrate a draw if there is none in his sport.

Oh let's say in the FA Cup if an unfancied side drew with a side like Chelsea away from home I think they'd be pleased.

I don't see 1-1 vs NZ in NZ as a failure. Sure it's not a win but it's still more than most of us expected.

Lions might have well won with a superior coach in charge but for once I am looking for the positives. Some of our players (English) have had vital experience putting a cat amongst the pigeons vs NZ. Making them seem mortal.

It bodes well I think for when the likes of England and Ireland face NZ next.

Could have been much worse. Our players could have come back with battered bodies and confidence. Not as if NZ blew the Lions away.

by No 7&1/2 Mon Jul 10, 2017 3:40 pm

That's true. A few injuries to key players soon starts to test nz. They don't quite have the unlimited number of players ready to slot in as some said.

by BamBam Mon Jul 10, 2017 3:41 pm

Its not a failure but its not a win

I said Murray wouldn't celebrate not winning, not that he'd celebrate a draw

My main point to Dowlais was that no one is hating Gatland for being a winner as he so cutely compared him to Man Utd/Andy Murray - as Gatland didn't bloody win

by beshocked Mon Jul 10, 2017 3:46 pm

No 7 & 1/2 Lions had injuries too - such as to Hogg and Billy V.

Also B.Youngs didn't tour for family issues.

Billy V vs Read is a H2H I am looking forward to.

Lions didn't really utilise the depth that it had.

Faletau didn't have a bad series but I think Billy V but would be an interesting challenge.

by No 7&1/2 Mon Jul 10, 2017 3:49 pm

Yes they did. Was more to the point of nz do not have that depth to maintain the high standard. Lions to an extent did though I rate williams and faletau less highly than hogg and Vunipola they are still top quality. England are.now looking strong across the board with not too much of a drop off anywhere.

by emack2 Mon Jul 10, 2017 5:00 pm

I don`t wish to get into an argument NZ still have a lot of talent coming
through.To lose arguably the best 10,11,12,7 in world rugby and expect
to replace them overnight is obvious.
Anyone who follows ITM/Mitre10/Super Rugby will attest to the quality
of the depth in NZ Rugby.
Faumina,Luatua,Kerr-Barlow,Crudon,Lowe are all signed up for Europe
Fekitoa is rumoured.
To expect instant replacements is stretching things BUT those introduced
all stepped up to the plate.
IF the likes of Luke Romano,Scott Barrett,Matt Todd,Luke Whitelock,
Ardea Savea,Brad Shields,Sopanga,Jordie Barrett,Duncan McKenzie
to name but a few can`t get regular games.
DON`T ever talk down what the Lions achieved it was sensantional
BUT now look at the facts.
They led the AB`s for only 4 minutes in 3 games total and it came
down to goalkicking in the end.
Owen Farrell has come under a lot of unfair criticisms from the media
BUT he`s played solidly and kicked his goals.
Given the Schedule the Lions had a very good overall result well done
to them.
On the other hand had NZ toured and returned with those results they
would be calling for major changes to coaches and players.

by No 7&1/2 Mon Jul 10, 2017 5:02 pm

If nz drew a 3 game series wish ireland or england I doubt there'd be major changes.

by mikey_dragon Mon Jul 10, 2017 8:00 pm

BamBam wrote:Fair play to Gatland for not losing the tour, but I struggle to call it a success

Maybe I'm blinkered, but to me, a successful tour is a winning tour - certain people on here seem to think that despite leading for about 3 mins during the Tests, this has been an unqualified success

Yeah you'd think that a successful tour is a winning tour, blatantly obvious really. 2013 was a winning tour and people still whinge about it, while Gatland is the most successful Lions coach of the pro era.

by GunsGermsV2 Tue Jul 11, 2017 9:08 am

Fair play to NZ winning the forward battle in all three tests, well done to the Lions for making the draw happen. Great series.

It was a penalty by Owens in the last minute however, Read was about three metres ahead of the restart and also could have been penalised for taking out the jumper in the air. As such they cant complain about the Poite decision really. Hansen and Read kept banging on about it in their pressers but they can complain.

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Tue Jul 11, 2017 9:19 am

GunsGermsV2 wrote:Fair play to NZ winning the forward battle in all three tests, well done to the Lions for making the draw happen. Great series.

It was a penalty by Owens in the last minute however, Read was about three metres ahead of the restart and also could have been penalised for taking out the jumper in the air. As such they cant complain about the Poite decision really. Hansen and Read kept banging on about it in their pressers but they can complain.

Bang on GG. Completely agree

by No 7&1/2 Tue Jul 11, 2017 9:19 am

Released when it was deemed not to have broken the law. Can we stop being all Jeremy kyle over things and being prejudiced?

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Tue Jul 11, 2017 9:21 am

No 7&1/2 wrote:Released when it was deemed not to have broken the law. Can we stop being all Jeremy kyle over things and being prejudiced?

Aye. Dropped home & told to sleep it off. Rugby player has too many drinks at the end of a tour shocker

by GunsGermsV2 Tue Jul 11, 2017 10:15 am

For the next tour I wonder should Lions management consider a chaperone for the English players or classes on how to act on a night out?

by TightHEAD Tue Jul 11, 2017 10:24 am

GunsGermsV2 wrote:For the next tour I wonder should Lions management consider a chaperone for the English players or classes on how to act on a night out?

What goes on tour..........etc

anyway the Dwarf shouldn't have fought back.

by Rory_Gallagher Tue Jul 11, 2017 10:24 am

More deleted comments. This place is a joke.

by Rory_Gallagher Tue Jul 11, 2017 10:26 am

Mods if you're going to delete my comments yet again at least have the courtesy to tell me why.

by TightHEAD Tue Jul 11, 2017 10:28 am

Calm down......

by **RDW** Tue Jul 11, 2017 10:29 am

Rory_Gallagher wrote:More deleted comments. This place is a joke.

I deleted them because this is a public forum and I need to protect the site's interests - posts aren't always removed because there is an offence committed.

Sicnkler had no charges brought against him - everyone should remembering that.

by Rory_Gallagher Tue Jul 11, 2017 10:31 am

TightHEAD wrote:Calm down......

If I was English I would toss a dwarf in your direction.

RDW - thanks for the response.

by Sgt_Pooly Tue Jul 11, 2017 10:43 am

Rory_Gallagher wrote:
TightHEAD wrote:Calm down......

If I was English I would toss a dwarf in your direction.

RDW - thanks for the response.

If Best was throwing it he'd miss Run

by GunsGermsV2 Tue Jul 11, 2017 10:44 am

TightHEAD wrote:
GunsGermsV2 wrote:For the next tour I wonder should Lions management consider a chaperone for the English players or classes on how to act on a night out?

What goes on tour..........etc

anyway the Dwarf shouldn't have fought back.

Haha

by GunsGermsV2 Tue Jul 11, 2017 10:44 am

Sgt_Pooly wrote:
Rory_Gallagher wrote:
TightHEAD wrote:Calm down......

If I was English I would toss a dwarf in your direction.

RDW - thanks for the response.

If Best was throwing it he'd miss

So would George picard

by Sgt_Pooly Tue Jul 11, 2017 10:47 am

GunsGermsV2 wrote:
Sgt_Pooly wrote:
Rory_Gallagher wrote:
TightHEAD wrote:Calm down......

If I was English I would toss a dwarf in your direction.

RDW - thanks for the response.

If Best was throwing it he'd miss

So would George

But he'd be playing against World Class dwarfs.....

by **George Carlin** Tue Jul 11, 2017 10:51 am

GunsGermsV2 wrote:
Sgt_Pooly wrote:
Rory_Gallagher wrote:
TightHEAD wrote:Calm down......

If I was English I would toss a dwarf in your direction.

RDW - thanks for the response.

If Best was throwing it he'd miss

So would George

No way. I am very accurate with my dwarfs. Cool

And before anyone starts, it is not 'dwarves'.

by GunsGermsV2 Tue Jul 11, 2017 10:59 am

Sgt_Pooly wrote:
GunsGermsV2 wrote:
Sgt_Pooly wrote:
Rory_Gallagher wrote:
TightHEAD wrote:Calm down......

If I was English I would toss a dwarf in your direction.

RDW - thanks for the response.

If Best was throwing it he'd miss

So would George

But he'd be playing against World Class dwarfs.....

and he would completely bottle it.

by Sgt_Pooly Tue Jul 11, 2017 11:02 am

At least he's given the chance to bottle it, Best is too busy doing commentary Wink

by GunsGermsV2 Tue Jul 11, 2017 11:20 am

Sgt_Pooly wrote:At least he's given the chance to bottle it, Best is too busy doing commentary

It was pretty obvious the way the tests panned out that George was too inexperienced for this level as his much lauded throwing failed him at key stages throughout the series. Good player but no where near Best's level yet.

Gatland got that one wrong but selection is tough when you have such a large and strong squad and he did a very good job over all.

by Gooseberry Tue Jul 11, 2017 11:27 am

GunsGermsV2 wrote:
Gatland got that one wrong but selection is tough when you have such a large and strong squad and he did a very good job over all.

Yeah he really shouldve given Russell a go over Sexton right?

by Sgt_Pooly Tue Jul 11, 2017 11:29 am

I don't think George has "lauded throwing", he's just a decent thrower.

by GunsGermsV2 Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:31 pm

Fair play to Warburton. Still not convinced that he is a great captain but he was a good captain on Saturday and has played well over two tests. Dealt with the media and refs well too.

by beshocked Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:40 pm

One person who hasn't really been talked about is Steve Borthwick.

He's quietly gone about his business as the Lions forwards coach and will come back to England with vital intel on NZ.

Been a pretty good start to his international coaching career so far!

by GunsGermsV2 Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:42 pm

beshocked wrote:One person who hasn't really been talked about is Steve Borthwick.

He's quietly gone about his business as the Lions forwards coach and will come back to England with vital intel on NZ.

Been a pretty good start to his international coaching career so far!

He is a good coach but the Lions forwards were a bit disappointing no?

by beshocked Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:54 pm

GunsGermsV2 wrote:
beshocked wrote:One person who hasn't really been talked about is Steve Borthwick.

He's quietly gone about his business as the Lions forwards coach and will come back to England with vital intel on NZ.

Been a pretty good start to his international coaching career so far!

He is a good coach but the Lions forwards were a bit disappointing no?

Really disappointing.... drawing with a Lions series with NZ in NZ.......

I am not saying the forwards were outstanding but the Lions is a thrown together team against one of the most cohesive/strongest teams in the world.

The scrum creaking isn't something that should be attributable to Borthwick as Rowntree was in charge of that anyway as the scrum coach.

I personally think Borthwick has really helped bring out the best in the English 2nd rows and I see it as no coincidence that's arguably England's strongest position.

He's clearly doing something right with his success with the Japanese forwards, the English forwards and helping the Lions forwards be competitive vs NZ.

by GunsGermsV2 Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:10 pm

Obviously Im not saying the draw was disappointing but I reckon the Lions forwards were dominated overall in all three tests although obviously they had their moments where they got on top which turned out to be enough.

by wayne Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:21 pm

beshocked wrote:
GunsGermsV2 wrote:
beshocked wrote:One person who hasn't really been talked about is Steve Borthwick.

He's quietly gone about his business as the Lions forwards coach and will come back to England with vital intel on NZ.

Been a pretty good start to his international coaching career so far!

He is a good coach but the Lions forwards were a bit disappointing no?

Really disappointing.... drawing with a Lions series with NZ in NZ.......

I am not saying the forwards were outstanding but the Lions is a thrown together team against one of the most cohesive/strongest teams in the world.

The scrum creaking isn't something that should be attributable to Borthwick as Rowntree was in charge of that anyway as the scrum coach.

I personally think Borthwick has really helped bring out the best in the English 2nd rows and I see it as no coincidence that's arguably England's strongest position.

He's clearly doing something right with his success with the Japanese forwards, the English forwards and helping the Lions forwards be competitive vs NZ.

Tell me something Beshocked, because the vast majority on this board is that Gatland and ONLY Gatland was selecting the forward unit and the 3 ENGLISHMAN would have no input whatsoever, even though part or the whole of their expertise was concerning the forwards, let me just add if you happened to read the Grant interview on another topic, he blamed Rowntree and ONLY Rowntree for not getting on the field on the 13 Tour. So what do you reckon 1 Welsh Coach overpowering the views of 3 Englishmen OR a collaborative approach?

by beshocked Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:23 pm

GunsGermsV2 wrote:Obviously Im not saying the draw was disappointing but I reckon the Lions forwards were dominated overall in all three tests although obviously they had their moments where they got on top which turned out to be enough.

You have to look at the context. The Lions is a thrown together pack and despite being down in statistics like territory and position they held their own.

NZ were expected to blow Lions away and they didn't - the pack must get a lot of credit for that because the pack is the platform.

It's about resilience, it's about putting in the hard yards and putting NZ under pressure. Forcing the errors. Taking the fight to NZ.

NZ are used to winning yet the Lions stubbornly refused to back down.

Wayne I sincerely doubt Rowntree,Borthwick or Farrell Sr would champion AWJ over let's say Kruis,Launchbury or Lawes or probably Henderson.

The main criticism has been the selection of AWJ - you seriously think Borthwick had the final say?

Gatland is the head coach.

I believe that Borthwick and Farrell Sr would have pushed for the selection of Itoje,George and Mako, whether you agree or not.

If I was going to break down selections I'd say -

Gatland selections - AWJ,Warburton,Faletau
Borthwick selections - Mako,George,Furlong,Itoje, Kruis (1st test)

Farrell Sr selection - Farrell Jr.

I think there was an element of bias yes.

If Billy was fit, I think the English coaches would have pressurised, Gatland to start Billy.

by GunsGermsV2 Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:26 pm

It is a thrown together side but I thought after over a month together they would have been cohesive enough by the last test in particular to dominate the ABs who I dont think are as good in the pack as the general consensus seems to dictate that they are. I think a very weak rugby championship made the ABs look a bit better than they are last year.

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:27 pm

beshocked wrote:
GunsGermsV2 wrote:Obviously Im not saying the draw was disappointing but I reckon the Lions forwards were dominated overall in all three tests although obviously they had their moments where they got on top which turned out to be enough.

You have to look at the context. The Lions is a thrown together pack and despite being down in statistics like territory and position they held their own.

NZ were expected to blow Lions away and they didn't - the pack must get a lot of credit for that because the pack is the platform.

It's about resilience, it's about putting in the hard yards and putting NZ under pressure. Forcing the errors. Taking the fight to NZ.

NZ are used to winning yet the Lions stubbornly refused to back down.

I seem to remember being told pre-tour by a lot of people on here that the Lions would have the edge up front. Whistle

Granted our backs were disappointing - while we did have a few injuries it showed that the young lads who came in needed a bit more tempering, and the Lions did an excellent job of shutting down Barrett

by GunsGermsV2 Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:30 pm

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

I seem to remember being told pre-tour by a lot of people on here that the Lions would have the edge up front.

Granted our backs were disappointing - while we did have a few injuries it showed that the young lads who came in needed a bit more tempering, and the Lions did an excellent job of shutting down Barrett

That was probably me. I think the Lions forwards should have done better. I still think that the AB forwards can be bossed by a very good pack. That doesn't mean they aren't good they just aren't unbeatable.

by beshocked Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:34 pm

Pete C well I think that was before Billy V got injured and of course a lot of us hoped Gatland wouldn't shoehorn in AWJ.

Still believe Lawes-Itoje would have been a better starting partnership with Henderson on the bench.

Lions had strong 2nd row options that weren't really properly utilised with Launchbury twiddling his thumbs at home and Lawes not getting a good runout.

I think if England can put together a cohesive non tired pack (this tour was at the end of a long season for us) against NZ in the AIs I think we'll do well.

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:36 pm

GunsGermsV2 wrote:
Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

I seem to remember being told pre-tour by a lot of people on here that the Lions would have the edge up front.

Granted our backs were disappointing - while we did have a few injuries it showed that the young lads who came in needed a bit more tempering, and the Lions did an excellent job of shutting down Barrett

That was probably me. I think the Lions forwards should have done better. I still think that the AB forwards can be bossed by a very good pack. That doesn't mean they aren't good they just aren't unbeatable.

In fairness it was quite a few people, across several different fora. The ABs pack is beatable at times, it's strength is that it's seldom dominated (Chicago being one notable exception), even if occasionally some teams gain an edge in some areas.

But 7 NZ forwards managed to hold their own against 8 Lions for a good 50 minutes in Wellington - while they faded eventually they kept NZ in with a shot. Shame the backs were firing blanks.

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:37 pm

beshocked wrote:Pete C well I think that was before Billy V got injured and of course a lot of us hoped Gatland wouldn't shoehorn in AWJ.

Still believe Lawes-Itoje would have been a better starting partnership with Henderson on the bench.

Lions had strong 2nd row options that weren't really properly utilised with Launchbury twiddling his thumbs at home and Lawes not getting a good runout.

I think if England can put together a cohesive non tired pack (this tour was at the end of a long season for us) against NZ in the AIs I think we'll do well.

I can't wait for 2018 Smile

by **LondonTiger** Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:40 pm

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:I seem to remember being told pre-tour by a lot of people on here that the Lions would have the edge up front.

Granted our backs were disappointing - while we did have a few injuries it showed that the young lads who came in needed a bit more tempering, and the Lions did an excellent job of shutting down Barrett

When asked what were the weaker areas of the NZ game, along with others, I suggested the scrum may be a weakness certainly compared to other areas of their game. Despite the NZ midfield misfiring, I still feel that the scrum is one of the weaker (or less strong for any snowflake kiwis) elements of their game. However the Lions chose not to try and beat them there leaving some stronger scrummagers out of the starting line-up.

After being second best in teh first test, the Lions forwards (in part due to player changes) probably did have the edge up front in T2 and T3. Held their own in scrums, were stronger at the lineout and much more physical at the breakdown. This latter outcome allowed the defence to gain an upper hand.

However, the one area of potential weakness I did highlight was BBs goalkicking, for which I was ridiculed. Apparently missing a kick here or there was not going to affect the outcome. I argue that the results suggest very much otherwise, especially as missing easy kicks in the last test caused his head to drop a little.

NZ could easily have won the series 3-0, but the basics let them down far too often. The entire Lions touring party deserve a lot of credit, whether it was the guys on the field, or those putting in huge shifts in the last two midweek games despite knowing they had zero chance of playing in the tests (Henderson, Cole and Best spring to mind). Gatland deserves a lot more credit for this drawn series than he does for 2013, and of his coaching staff Andy Farrell was responsible for the most successful part of the team.

by beshocked Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:43 pm

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:
beshocked wrote:Pete C well I think that was before Billy V got injured and of course a lot of us hoped Gatland wouldn't shoehorn in AWJ.

Still believe Lawes-Itoje would have been a better starting partnership with Henderson on the bench.

Lions had strong 2nd row options that weren't really properly utilised with Launchbury twiddling his thumbs at home and Lawes not getting a good runout.

I think if England can put together a cohesive non tired pack (this tour was at the end of a long season for us) against NZ in the AIs I think we'll do well.

I can't wait for 2018

Neither can I, I think we can take the fight to you. Also gives England a little bit more time to keep developing key positions. Backrow and centres in particular still need tweaking.

NZ are still the team to beat but this tour has shown NZ are mortal. It's also vital experience for players who had never faced NZ before.

by GunsGermsV2 Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:45 pm

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:
GunsGermsV2 wrote:
Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

I seem to remember being told pre-tour by a lot of people on here that the Lions would have the edge up front.

Granted our backs were disappointing - while we did have a few injuries it showed that the young lads who came in needed a bit more tempering, and the Lions did an excellent job of shutting down Barrett

That was probably me. I think the Lions forwards should have done better. I still think that the AB forwards can be bossed by a very good pack. That doesn't mean they aren't good they just aren't unbeatable.

In fairness it was quite a few people, across several different fora. The ABs pack is beatable at times, it's strength is that it's seldom dominated (Chicago being one notable exception), even if occasionally some teams gain an edge in some areas.

But 7 NZ forwards managed to hold their own against 8 Lions for a good 50 minutes in Wellington - while they faded eventually they kept NZ in with a shot. Shame the backs were firing blanks.

Yes they did and that surprised me. I still dont know if that is down to the ABs brilliance that day or incompetence from the Lions. Maybe a bit of both?

by wayne Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:47 pm

beshocked wrote:
GunsGermsV2 wrote:Obviously Im not saying the draw was disappointing but I reckon the Lions forwards were dominated overall in all three tests although obviously they had their moments where they got on top which turned out to be enough.

You have to look at the context. The Lions is a thrown together pack and despite being down in statistics like territory and position they held their own.

NZ were expected to blow Lions away and they didn't - the pack must get a lot of credit for that because the pack is the platform.

It's about resilience, it's about putting in the hard yards and putting NZ under pressure. Forcing the errors. Taking the fight to NZ.

NZ are used to winning yet the Lions stubbornly refused to back down.

Wayne I sincerely doubt Rowntree,Borthwick or Farrell Sr would champion AWJ over let's say Kruis,Launchbury or Lawes or probably Henderson.

The main criticism has been the selection of AWJ - you seriously think Borthwick had the final say?

Gatland is the head coach.

I believe that Borthwick and Farrell Sr would have pushed for the selection of Itoje,George and Mako, whether you agree or not.

If I was going to break down selections I'd say -

Gatland selections - AWJ,Warburton,Faletau
Borthwick selections - Mako,George,Furlong,Itoje, Kruis (1st test)

Farrell Sr selection - Farrell Jr.

I think there was an element of bias yes.

Beshocked I was being a little bit sly with that question, because if you bothered to watch the BBC 5LIVE programme in the lead up to the first test, during it there was a podcast with Sir Ian McGeechan and he was asked how they came to picking the Team for each Test, did you select it, or did each of you fetch your own Team written down and go from there. His answer was NEITHER we went through each player for each position and we carried on until there was a consensus, he said the last time he was the man in charge that was the format and the same happened in 2013. So I would bet a pound to a penny the same happened on this Tour. Because if it was any different do you think the likes of Howley, Jenkins, Farrell and Rowntree would return after having that exposure in 2013.

So the success or failure was a collaborative effort, with obviously Gatland getting the Lions share, because he brought the Team together.

by Scottrf Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:49 pm

The idea that you can get a consensus on a lineup is a fantasy land. What he means is that the most influential person got their way, or the resistance tired.

by beshocked Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:52 pm

wayne wrote:
beshocked wrote:
GunsGermsV2 wrote:Obviously Im not saying the draw was disappointing but I reckon the Lions forwards were dominated overall in all three tests although obviously they had their moments where they got on top which turned out to be enough.

You have to look at the context. The Lions is a thrown together pack and despite being down in statistics like territory and position they held their own.

NZ were expected to blow Lions away and they didn't - the pack must get a lot of credit for that because the pack is the platform.

It's about resilience, it's about putting in the hard yards and putting NZ under pressure. Forcing the errors. Taking the fight to NZ.

NZ are used to winning yet the Lions stubbornly refused to back down.

Wayne I sincerely doubt Rowntree,Borthwick or Farrell Sr would champion AWJ over let's say Kruis,Launchbury or Lawes or probably Henderson.

The main criticism has been the selection of AWJ - you seriously think Borthwick had the final say?

Gatland is the head coach.

I believe that Borthwick and Farrell Sr would have pushed for the selection of Itoje,George and Mako, whether you agree or not.

If I was going to break down selections I'd say -

Gatland selections - AWJ,Warburton,Faletau
Borthwick selections - Mako,George,Furlong,Itoje, Kruis (1st test)

Farrell Sr selection - Farrell Jr.

I think there was an element of bias yes.

Beshocked I was being a little bit sly with that question, because if you bothered to watch the BBC 5LIVE programme in the lead up to the first test, during it there was a podcast with Sir Ian McGeechan and he was asked how they came to picking the Team for each Test, did you select it, or did each of you fetch your own Team written down and go from there. His answer was NEITHER we went through each player for each position and we carried on until there was a consensus, he said the last time he was the man in charge that was the format and the same happened in 2013. So I would bet a pound to a penny the same happened on this Tour. Because if it was any different do you think the likes of Howley, Jenkins, Farrell and Rowntree would return after having that exposure in 2013.

So the success or failure was a collaborative effort, with obviously Gatland getting the Lions share, because he brought the Team together.

Yes it might be a collaborative effort but of course certain people will champion certain players.

I expect Gatland's choice was AWJ but as a compromise he promoted Itoje after the 1st test.

Gatland is the head coach ultimately it's his final decision but doesn't mean everyone agreed with him on everything.

Well said scottrf.

As I say I find it hard to believe Borthwick would really want AWJ to start ahead of the likes of Kruis or Lawes.

by wayne Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:53 pm

Scottrf wrote:The idea that you can get a consensus on a lineup is a fantasy land. What he means is that the most influential person got their way, or the resistance tired.

Why not go and have a look at the podcast then, because that is what he said.
Moron

by Sponsored content