Blues v British & Irish Lions, 7 June

Blues v British & Irish Lions
7 June 2017
KO: 19:35 NZST (8.35am BST)
Eden Park, Auckland

Live on Sky Sports, Sky Sports HD and SkyGo

Referee: Pascal Gaüzère (France)
Touch judges: [tbc]
TMO: [tbc]

A. FORM:

19 June 1993: Auckland 23 - 18 British & Irish Lions

18 May 1983: Auckland 13 - 12 British & Irish Lions

23 June 1977: Auckland 15 - 34 British & Irish Lions

B. TEAMS:

Blues 
15 Michael Collins
14 Matt Duffie
13 George Moala
12 Sonny Bill Williams
11 Rieko Ioane
10 Stephen Perofeta
09 Augustine Pulu

08 Steven Luatua
07 Blake Gibson
06 Akira Ioane
05 Scott Scrafton
04 Gerard Cowley-Tuioti
03 Charlie Faumuina
02 James Parson
01 Ofa Tu'ungafasi

16 Hame Faiva
17 Alex Hodgman
18 Sione Mafileo
19 Patrick Tuipulotu
20 Kara Pryor
21 Sam Nock
22 Ihaia West
23 TJ Faiane/Melani Nanai

British & Irish Lions

Halfpenny; Nowell, Payne, Henshaw, Daly; Biggar, Webb; McGrath, Owens (captain), Cole, Itoje, Lawes, Haskell, Tipuric, Stander

Replacements: Best, Marler, Sinckler, Henderson, O'Mahony, Laidlaw, Sexton, L Williams

C. PREVIEW

Against seriousley limited opposition, too many of the first group to audition for test spots fluffed their lines. The next group have to do better, or we are looking at a loss.

Possible starting Xv (looking only at guys not to feature)

McGrath, George, Cole, Itoje, Lawes, POM, SOB, Stander, Murray, Biggar, North, Henshaw, JD2, Williams, 1/2p.

As I put on a different thread, I think you've got to pick this team and the next team together, as it's a balancing act to get all your players game time, but also to shuffle your likely test contenders into Saturday starting positions.

Lions vs Blues: McGrath, Owens, Cole, Itoje, Lawes, Haskell, Tipuric, O'Brien, Murray, Biggar, Daly, Henshaw, Payne, Nowell, Hogg.
Lions vs Crusaders: Mako Vunipola, George, Furlong, Jones, Kruis, O'Mahony, Warburton, Stander, Webb, Farrell, North, Te'o, Davies, Williams, Halfpenny

I'll have to see what team Gatland actually picks, but based on his likely test starters I can see him going with two sides like that.

Let's be under no illusions - on current form, the Crusaders are a far, far bigger test than the Blues will be.

But it's all relative apparently, judging by the wet fart which constituted our last performance.

I would settle for us being able to beat a team of full time professional opponents.

The Crusaders will be the toughest game outside of the tests - I think we should put out our strongest team possible for that (although we might not know what that is yet!).

As he has promised to give everyone a start in the first three games, there is no chance of having the strongest team out for the third game in the tour.

Anyone who started on Saturday, won't be starting on Wednesday, although some of them may bench. A lot of the guys who benched on Saturday, may well end up starting next Saturday against the Crusaders.

We may well lose some of the games against the Super Rugby sides, in many ways it would be amazing if we do not. The point of these games is for us to get up to speed and get out a test side that are familiar and can play with each other.

I would imagine this Wednesday team will be:

McGrath
Owens
Cole
Itojie
Lawes
Haskell
Stander
O'Brien
Murray
Biggar
North
Henshaw
JD2
Daley (he did not come off the bench, so should play)
Halfpenny

The bench will be made up of players who played on Saturday.

As he has promised to give everyone a start in the first three games, there is no chance of having the strongest team out for the third game in the tour.

True, but I think he'll try to get as many of his test players in place for the Crusaders fixture within the parameters of giving everyone a start.

Sorry to sound miserable but I just can't see us winning against any of the super rugby teams. These are club sides that that been together for years, playing in arguably the top league in the world, know the team moves and drills inside out. Granted they'll be playing NH international players (without their own All Blacks too), but as we saw the other day we're a disparate bunch who are still learning each other's names! It's such a tough ask. Fingers crossed it's close but it's a tall order second game in (and first game for most of the Lions players probably) to be able to match or beat a pro club side from NZ while adapting to brand new patterns, plays, combinations, etc. Just hope it's a good exercise in identifying a number of players who put their hands up for the test team.

I'd be pretty stoked if one of our SR teams or the Māori ABs beat the Lions. In the last game the Lions didn't stick to their knitting by kicking points on offer. The Lions could have built up a better lead by 3s and demoralise the NZ Baabaas, whom to be fair, didn't really threaten. If the Lions don't play ruthlessly then they could come undone.

ebop wrote:I'd be pretty stoked if one of our SR teams or the Māori ABs beat the Lions. In the last game the Lions didn't stick to their knitting by kicking points on offer. The Lions could have built up a better lead by 3s and demoralise the NZ Baabaas, whom to be fair, didn't really threaten. If the Lions don't play ruthlessly then they could come undone.

We were going for the 3 pointers and I was saying we shouldn't as it's the lineouts and driving mauls that need practice!

Kicked two right?

That's not many

I recall a few scrums being taken for the option. And an ill advised quick tap from a 'prop' that didn't amount to much.

I thought the Lions didn't respect the opposition

And the Lions scrum was underwhelming

ebop wrote:Kicked two right?

That's not many

I recall a few scrums being taken for the option. And an ill advised quick tap from a 'prop' that didn't amount to much.

I thought the Lions didn't respect the opposition

And the Lions scrum was underwhelming

That's an odd comment!  I assume the NZ Barbarians didn't respect the Lions either as they kicked for the corner for the lineout quite a bit rather than kick their own penalties?!  They probably would have won if they'd kicked those points instead!

Edit: I think we kicked at least 4. Farrell and Sexton both kicked one and missed one. I think.

Nah I don't reckon it's odd. The NZ Barbarians were never going to win so they threw all they had at it. Which wasn't much. The Lions needed to exert more authority. And they did in many aspects but it seemed as though they just thought things would happen. That a quick tap will result in points. That a scrum option near the line will result in points. Etc.

ebop wrote:Nah I don't reckon it's odd. The NZ Barbarians were never going to win so they threw all they had at it. Which wasn't much. The Lions needed to exert more authority. And they did in many aspects but it seemed as though they just thought things would happen. That a quick tap will result in points. That a scrum option near the line will result in points. Etc. And that's a lack of respect imo.

Both ways then.

Plus, your own fans booed the Lions for going for the posts. Why would they boo if they thought that doing the opposite (taking the tap or the scrum) was a lack of respect? They would have booed the lack for respect for taking the quick tap, right? No, they didn't.

Got nothing to do with the fans Griff

You know Griff, the Lions should have pummelled the no-name NZ barbarians into the ground. They didn't. Why?

And don't say jet lag

Jet lag played a part. Below par performances from a few key players and a few mistakes where we should have scored tries but butchered them instead. It's a warm up mistakes aren't really important if we do learn from them for the tests.

Jet lag

Jet lag your bloody self!!!

ebop wrote:Got nothing to do with the fans Griff

You know Griff, the Lions should have pummelled the no-name NZ barbarians into the ground. They didn't. Why?

And don't say jet lag

You've lost me now. The Lions were nearly beaten because they did not play well and the opposition were good. Not sure where the lack of respect thing comes in though? I think you're trying to find offense where none exists.

This ebop person is just a WUM so I suggest we all just ignore him.

kingelderfield wrote:This ebop person is just a WUM so I suggest we all just ignore him.

Good on ya mate

Griff wrote:

ebop wrote:Got nothing to do with the fans Griff

You know Griff, the Lions should have pummelled the no-name NZ barbarians into the ground. They didn't. Why?

And don't say jet lag

You've lost me now.  The Lions were nearly beaten because they did not play well and the opposition were good.  Not sure where the lack of respect thing comes in though?  I think you're trying to find offense where none exists.  

The opposition weren't good though

Don't even know any of them

The Lions thought they could play a loosey goosey props doing quick taps and passing up gift 3s kind of game because they 'are' a far superior outfit, but basically, weren't conservative enough because they didn't respect the opposition. If they go in with that attitude against the SR teams then it'll be interesting.

Rather not foe anyone

We're all adults right?

Except gwlad

George Carlin wrote:Ladies, please. Foe those fellers that you don't like. It really works.

George I take your point but I don't turn away from issues.

Well if that's the case kingelderfield, why was that Lions performance so underwhelming?

And don't say jet lag

kingelderfield wrote:

George Carlin wrote:Ladies, please. Foe those fellers that you don't like. It really works.

George I take your point but I don't turn away from issues.

Have you been speaking to my wife?

Ebop

Given a mod has just issued a request you should probably edit that last bit out.

What do you mean mikey?

I don't think anyone was impressed with that performance, not even Warburton, despite his comments in the post-match interview (Hope that's not the influence of Steve Borthwick )

Still, it's a big reach to say the Lions disrespected the NZ Barbarians. Unless you want to say the NZ public and press also disrespected them, since they mostly expected a Lions victory too. I only say "mostly" rather than "universally" on the off-chance that someone, somewhere forecast a Barbarians win instead.

The crowd were booing the Lions throughout the match for kicking penalties, so the idea they kept turning down points is entirely at odds with what happened in the game. Sure, there was one tap penalty by Kyle Sinckler, which went pear-shaped. However, he might reasonably have expected the ref to penalize the opposition for not retreating 10, since he'd made the same call the other way earlier in the game.

The front rows are going to be very hard to juggle with the non-stop schedule.

Most of the 9 front rows are going to need to start and bench a game with a 3-4 day turnaround depending on which matches they play in. That is just in the first week as well with the coaches wanting to give everyone a start in the first 3 games - a good move IMO.

I wouldn't be surprised to see some replacement front rows out on tour in pretty short notice.

I have absolutely no idea how anybody could say that the lions disrespected the BaaBaas team.

Anyway, I think we will lose more of these warm up games than we win, the super rugby teams are chock full of talent. However, i'm frankly not that bothered as long as there is a general trend that shows improvement and our starting team looks to be coming together. Nobody is going to remember the warm up games if the Lions somehow end up winning the series.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Jet lag played a part. Below par performances from a few key players and a few mistakes where we should have scored tries but butchered them instead. It's a warm up mistakes aren't really important if we do learn from them for the tests.

 The Blues only got back from Samoa yesterday.

Blues

1.McGrath 2.Owens 3.Cole 4.Itoje 5.Lawes 6.POM 7.SOB 8.Stander
9.Webb 10.Biggar 11.North 12.Henshaw 13.Davies 14.Halfpenny 15.Williams

16.Best 17.Marler 18.Sinckler 19.Henderson 20.Moriarty 21.Laidlaw 22.Farrell 23.Payne

Crusaders

1.Vunipola 2.George 3.Furlong 4.AWJ 5.Kruis 6.Haskell 7.Tipuric 8.Faletau
9.Murray 10.Sexton 11.Seymour 12.Farrell 13.Payne 14.Daly 15.Hogg

16.Owens 17.McGrath 18.Cole 19.Itoje 20.Warburton 21.Webb 22.Te'o 23.Joseph

Something like that would give all players in the squad a start over the first 3 games. It would also prioritise giving a Wednesday start to player who weren't involved at all against the NZ Baabaas.

Having come up with the sides I'll admit I don't particularly like them. The Farrell/Payne centre partnership in particular looks poorly balanced. The 'cramped' schedule means that most of the sides we see won't look too balanced though.

You'll known better than me, but my understanding is that a handful of players were held back for the Lions?
I watched the Blues/Reds game and the conditions looked quite torrid. So if I'm reading you correctly then I would agree that the Blues will be effected by the short turn around?

aucklandlaurie wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Jet lag played a part. Below par performances from a few key players and a few mistakes where we should have scored tries but butchered them instead. It's a warm up mistakes aren't really important if we do learn from them for the tests.

 The Blues only got back from Samoa yesterday.

To be fair, Samoa is not a 12 hour time difference, though the travelling they have had to do won't help them either.

I don't get why people have been so dismissive about the jet lag, it is a real effect the and time between when they landed and the first game was nothing at all. I do regular shift work and have to do quick change arounds between days and nights. It can take days to get a set of nights out of the system and is often compared to jet lag. I have been doing it for years and it never gets any easier. Yes I can go into work and function when I am feeling tired, but that is a long way different from performing at your best in a very high intensity game of rugby. I used to play rugby after night shifts in my younger days and it was awful, you were always a step slower than you should have been.

Anyway, it will settle down now and they will get into tune with the new time zone. I don't think we will be hearing that reason used again for a poor performance. I am reasonably hopeful that the performances will pick up naturally as the tour goes on.

kingelderfield wrote:You'll known better than me, but my understanding is that a handful of players were held back for the Lions?
I watched the Blues/Reds game and the conditions looked quite torrid. So if I'm reading you correctly then I would agree that the Blues will be effected by the short turn around?

 Since The Lions can claim jetlag  I thought Auckland could as well. the Lions endured the demands of flying from Melbourne to Auckland last Wednesday morning after having a nights sleepover, and we are told the purpose of the sleepover was to combat the effects of jetlag. 

 The short turn around is a constant issue when playing Super Rugby, we have seen teams literally fly round the World in a fifteen day spread and include games on three different Continents along the way.

BigGee wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Jet lag played a part. Below par performances from a few key players and a few mistakes where we should have scored tries but butchered them instead. It's a warm up mistakes aren't really important if we do learn from them for the tests.

 The Blues only got back from Samoa yesterday.

To be fair, Samoa is not a 12 hour time difference, though the travelling they have had to do won't help them either.

I don't get why people have been so dismissive about the jet lag, it is a real effect the and time between when they landed and the first game was nothing at all. I do regular shift work and have to do quick change arounds between days and nights. It can take days to get a set of nights out of the system and is often compared to jet lag. I have been doing it for years and it never gets any easier. Yes I can go into work and function when I am feeling tired, but that is a long way different from performing at your best in a very high intensity game of rugby. I used to play rugby after night shifts in my younger days and it was awful, you were always a step slower than you should have been.

Anyway, it will settle down now and they will get into tune with the new time zone. I don't think we will be hearing that reason used again for a poor performance. I am reasonably hopeful that the performances will pick up naturally as the tour goes on.

 To be fair, Melbourne is not 12 hours behind Auckland.

 I find with night shift  that to go from days to nights and not the other way round is a lot more acceptable to the body.

Forgive my ignorance but what's the time difference between samoa and nz. Could help us.

Samoa is one hour ahead of Auckland.
 Auckland is two hours ahead of Melbourne.

George Carlin wrote:

kingelderfield wrote:

George Carlin wrote:Ladies, please. Foe those fellers that you don't like. It really works.

George I take your point but I don't turn away from issues.

Have you been speaking to my wife?

You've made me laugh, good one.

king_carlos wrote:Blues

1.McGrath 2.Owens 3.Cole 4.Itoje 5.Lawes 6.POM 7.SOB 8.Stander
9.Webb 10.Biggar 11.North 12.Henshaw 13.Davies 14.Halfpenny 15.Williams

16.Best 17.Marler 18.Sinckler 19.Henderson 20.Moriarty 21.Laidlaw 22.Farrell 23.Payne

Crusaders

1.Vunipola 2.George 3.Furlong 4.AWJ 5.Kruis 6.Haskell 7.Tipuric 8.Faletau
9.Murray 10.Sexton 11.Seymour 12.Farrell 13.Payne 14.Daly 15.Hogg

16.Owens 17.McGrath 18.Cole 19.Itoje 20.Warburton 21.Webb 22.Te'o 23.Joseph

Something like that would give all players in the squad a start over the first 3 games. It would also prioritise giving a Wednesday start to player who weren't involved at all against the NZ Baabaas.

Having come up with the sides I'll admit I don't particularly like them. The Farrell/Payne centre partnership in particular looks poorly balanced. The 'cramped' schedule means that most of the sides we see won't look too balanced though.

That is a very balanced approach but I am not so sure about Payne and Sexton anymore. Payne seems to get injured a lot and Sexton seems permanently injured. I would certainly asses them both very carefully before selecting them. May seem harsh but history of injuries is against them and that is often due to them returning to games before being 100% fit.

I would give Henderson another chance but he will have to perform very well to get selected again.

Not sure that can give you jet lag then Laurie.

Henderson is one player that just marked himself out as a midweek player; there is no time for an opportunity for second chances here, he played poorly against a scratch team and was beaten for the try. Not a Lions tests lock. Hogg also seemed ponderous. Clearly the test 2nd row should be Itoje and Kruis - we can't allow the lineout to fall apart as it did in 05 - I'd have AWJ on the bench  as he needs to start another game otherwise Lawes may be the better option for impact, though he has been questionable when recycling possession.

I want to see this team v the Blues
Mako George Sinckler
Itoje Kruis
Tipuric Stander POM
Webb
Farrell
North
Henshaw
JD2
Daly
Williams

I don't think you can rule anyone out just yet. Even if someone doesn't get to start one of the next two games, they'll start one of the next two midweek games and could play themselves back in for a test place; especially if the first one doesn't go to plan

Gwlad wrote:Henderson is one player that just marked himself out as a midweek player; there is no time for an opportunity for second chances here, he played poorly against a scratch team and was beaten for the try. Not a Lions tests lock. Hogg also seemed ponderous. Clearly the test 2nd row should be Itoje and Kruis - we can't allow the lineout  to fall apart as it did in 05 - I'd have AWJ on the bench  as he needs to start another game otherwise Lawes may be the better option for impact, though he has been questionable when recycling possession.

I know you love a wind up, Gwlad. But surely if you're scratching Henderson off the test list completely then you've got to scratch off AWJ. Both were gash. As was Sexton. Are they all off the list now?

Griff wrote:

Gwlad wrote:Henderson is one player that just marked himself out as a midweek player; there is no time for an opportunity for second chances here, he played poorly against a scratch team and was beaten for the try. Not a Lions tests lock. Hogg also seemed ponderous. Clearly the test 2nd row should be Itoje and Kruis - we can't allow the lineout  to fall apart as it did in 05 - I'd have AWJ on the bench  as he needs to start another game otherwise Lawes may be the better option for impact, though he has been questionable when recycling possession.

I know you love a wind up, Gwlad. But surely if you're scratching Henderson off the test list completely then you've got to scratch off AWJ. Both were gash. As was Sexton. Are they all off the list now?

Apart from two knock-ons (expected with rustiness) what did AWJ do wrong? I wouldn't strike Henderson off just yet either - we know he's good enough he just needs another opportunity. Test 2nd row for now is Itoje and Kruis unless one of Lawes or AWJ can play themselves in which shifts Itoje to 6.

Gwlad wrote:I want to see this team v the Blues
Mako George Sinckler
Itoje Kruis
Tipuric Stander POM
Webb
Farrell
North
Henshaw
JD2
Daly
Williams

That would mean a second start in 4 days for Sinckler and rule out all three tight heads starting one of the first three games. I expect that Cole will start against the Blues with Furlong starting the Saders game.