Chiefs v British & Irish Lions, 20 June

jimbopip wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

George Carlin wrote:I wonder if anyone will change their mind about this if we actually beat the Chiefs.

FWIW I won't.

Actually, Dave Rennie has won the first battle ahead of tomorrows game. The BBC has a link to a Kiwi paper where the Chiefs team was read out by a 10 year old fan who had e-mailed his selection to Rennie a few weeks ago. Seem s Rennie got back to him, they discussed it and agreed the 23. The lad was then invited in to meet the squad and tell them who was playing. Excellent PR.

From a Glasgow perspective, this bodes well for the next couple of seasons.

Also Stephen Jones, on Twitter, seems to be suggestiong that one Scotland player said "stuff it" to Gatland at the weekend. My money is on Little Jonny.

Griff wrote:We could do with these snubs, if true, coming out in the media.  It perhaps puts some of the other call-ups into context.  If players are turning the Lions down then it perhaps explains why he's gone for some of these odd selections.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

Griff wrote:We could do with these snubs, if true, coming out in the media.  It perhaps puts some of the other call-ups into context.  If players are turning the Lions down then it perhaps explains why he's gone for some of these odd selections.

Not really unless Launchbury and a host of others also turned it down.

Griff wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

Griff wrote:We could do with these snubs, if true, coming out in the media.  It perhaps puts some of the other call-ups into context.  If players are turning the Lions down then it perhaps explains why he's gone for some of these odd selections.

Not really unless Launchbury and a host of others also turned it down.

Exactly. If we're not told about the snubs then we'll never know the context for those decisions.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

Griff wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

Griff wrote:We could do with these snubs, if true, coming out in the media.  It perhaps puts some of the other call-ups into context.  If players are turning the Lions down then it perhaps explains why he's gone for some of these odd selections.

Not really unless Launchbury and a host of others also turned it down.

Exactly. If we're not told about the snubs then we'll never know the context for those decisions.

We don't need to do we, the context is Gatland selecting Welsh players who aren't good enough.

RDW_Scotland wrote:I'd be disappointed if they did that to be honest - Lions coaches don't need any more reason not to pick Scottish players and if they've turned it down that really doesn't help our case for future tours if we get a certain reputation.

Also, 4 years is a long time in rugby and the chance to become a Lion isn't one that should be turned down readily.

This gossip could of course all be a load of Love sacks of course!

robbo277 wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

SamTheQuin wrote:But still got to support the guys, Gatland clearly only cares about the Test series and not so much on the tradition of what a Lions tour is.

Thing is really that is all he will be judged on. Should the test series be won, the tour (and thus Gats) will be deemed a success. If lost then it would be deemed a failure (certainly on Gats CV) irrespective of how well the other games went.

Of course lose the test series 3-0 and the 2021 series will again (like 2009) be a time when the "ethos" of the Lions needs to be rebuilt.

I'm not sure that's entirely right. Generally the 2009 tour was considered to be pretty successful despite a loss in the Test series, while 2013 seems to be a bit marmite with fans. Of course, you could argue the 09 SA side was much stronger than the 13 Aus one, and having a current national team head coach be responsible for the Lions in 2013 (and this tour) may also have exacerbated tribalism among fans, which didn't help. There's also the fact that the 09 tour came off the back of an unmitigated disaster in 05 when the future of the Lions was being questioned, while 13 came off the back of a pretty decent 09 tour. But overall, I think the success of a Lions tour shouldn't be reduced to whether the Test series is won. For me it's a whole host of factors including things like "ethos" and picking a bunch of club players in a pre-planned move as cannon fodder for the mid-week side doesn't help.

If we lose the test series 3-0 (with 1 thrashing), then this tour will have been worse than 2005.

It's not that test success is the only measure of success for a Lions tour (although it is the strongest), but this year a test triumph is the only way Gatland can vindicate what's gone before: initially selecting injured/out of form players; stoneage tactics; splitting the squad and losing first 2 midweek games and the call-ups on convenience not merit.

None of the decisions have sat well with the majority of the fans. If he can win a test series off the back of it, he can stick his finger up as his decisions will be vindicated. If he can't, then he has nothing to point to as a success. Unless you count an (at best) 5/2 record in the warm-ups as a successful tour.

R!skysports wrote:I would hope they wont not snub it, but if they were told that you are only coming over as bench cover for the mid week game then you can bugger off again (Which is what gatland has implied), then I can understand why they did - especially as they have the next game to complete a clean sweep of the Internationals.

If true (and it may not of course be total horlicks) then the Lions is in real trouble as a concept

Griff wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

SamTheQuin wrote:But still got to support the guys, Gatland clearly only cares about the Test series and not so much on the tradition of what a Lions tour is.

Thing is really that is all he will be judged on. Should the test series be won, the tour (and thus Gats) will be deemed a success. If lost then it would be deemed a failure (certainly on Gats CV) irrespective of how well the other games went.

Of course lose the test series 3-0 and the 2021 series will again (like 2009) be a time when the "ethos" of the Lions needs to be rebuilt.

I'm not sure that's entirely right. Generally the 2009 tour was considered to be pretty successful despite a loss in the Test series, while 2013 seems to be a bit marmite with fans. Of course, you could argue the 09 SA side was much stronger than the 13 Aus one, and having a current national team head coach be responsible for the Lions in 2013 (and this tour) may also have exacerbated tribalism among fans, which didn't help. There's also the fact that the 09 tour came off the back of an unmitigated disaster in 05 when the future of the Lions was being questioned, while 13 came off the back of a pretty decent 09 tour. But overall, I think the success of a Lions tour shouldn't be reduced to whether the Test series is won. For me it's a whole host of factors including things like "ethos" and picking a bunch of club players in a pre-planned move as cannon fodder for the mid-week side doesn't help.

If we lose the test series 3-0 (with 1 thrashing), then this tour will have been worse than 2005.

It's not that test success is the only measure of success for a Lions tour (although it is the strongest), but this year a test triumph is the only way Gatland can vindicate what's gone before: initially selecting injured/out of form players; stoneage tactics; splitting the squad and losing first 2 midweek games and the call-ups on convenience not merit.

None of the decisions have sat well with the majority of the fans. If he can win a test series off the back of it, he can stick his finger up as his decisions will be vindicated. If he can't, then he has nothing to point to as a success. Unless you count an (at best) 5/2 record in the warm-ups as a successful tour.

I tend to agree that unless we win at least 1 test then this will be seen in a bad light.  But this time around it's a much harder task than 2005.  Not only the schedule is tougher but let's not forget that in 2005 we only played the NPC sides, not the Super Rugby sides.  Much harder this time.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

jimbopip wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

George Carlin wrote:I wonder if anyone will change their mind about this if we actually beat the Chiefs.

FWIW I won't.

Actually, Dave Rennie has won the first battle ahead of tomorrows game. The BBC has a link to a Kiwi paper where the Chiefs team was read out by a 10 year old fan who had e-mailed his selection to Rennie a few weeks ago. Seem s Rennie got back to him, they discussed it and agreed the 23. The lad was then invited in to meet the squad and tell them who was playing. Excellent PR.

From a Glasgow perspective, this bodes well for the next couple of seasons.

Also Stephen Jones, on Twitter, seems to be suggestiong that one Scotland player said "stuff it" to Gatland at the weekend. My money is on Little Jonny.

That's quite a snub if true.

No9 wrote:

EST wrote:

No9 wrote:Good God..

What a bunch of morons on here...

The call ups are needed to cover the MIDWEEK games only, so that the possible Test players don't have to warm mid-week benches. That's makes perfect sense.

Now, with a game on Tuesday and one a week later, and with it taking over a week to get over jet lag, why would you bring any players in that would not have time to acclimatise. Hence, you bring in players already there or in neighbouring time zones.

So, what cover is needed.

1. Scrum Half - yes, only 3 on tour, need a 4th to give 2 per team breakdown. Who's the best available, simple Gareth Davies way above Ali Price or Pyrgos.

2. Fly Half - Yes, again only 3 on tour, need a 4th. Finn Russell obvious and just announced called up. Wasn't going to announce it BEFORE they played Australia or during the Lions game, so keep your hair on guys, it was just a timing thing.

The 2 call ups above also work out on experienced partnerships, ie Russell/Laidlaw and Biggar/Davies, as they are the expected midweek half-backs for the remaining games.  The still have chance to put their hands up for a Test spot, but that's going to be tough.

As for the other call-ups, not 100% sure they are needed, as there does seem to be cover in those spots, and also not sure they will feature.

But if you (English) really want to drag an English player from Argentina, at the end of a season, for them to break themselves playing in one mid-week game (as that's all they could do) then you need your head examined.

I dont think anybody is complaining about Davies or Russell, it's the other four which are terrible decisions.  Why not pick Gray over Hill?  He picked Russell, so it's obviously not the distance.

Ever thought he may have sounded Gray and the Scottish management out, and said.... "We need cover, there's no guarantee of a game, are you interested..." and Gray said "NO!!".. We do know that Russell and Davies will get games, even if off the bench, as they don't have the depth at 9 and 10, but the others may simply be for training cover, and Gats may not want to insult players like Gray for that role...

If this was earlier in the tour, even last week, with more chance of the replacements being able to have an impact, maybe I'd be more critical, but to me the decision isn't a problem. Just too many out there with bruised egos looking for a problem.

I actually predicted this happening on a thread 2 weeks ago, but cant find where I said it... (not the actual individuals called up, but the approach of calling up from the Welsh squad in NZ).

BigGee wrote:The only Scottish players who I could imagine saying no are Ford, in that he has the t-shirt and probably just fancies getting home for the rest of the summer or potentially Nel, who may not quite get the Lions and maybe feels his long term situation might be better served by not getting totally flogged over the summer.

I can't believe that JG or FB would have said no, nor that Toonie would have encouraged them to do so. He was quoted earlier on that he hoped to see more Scottish call ups.

As others have said, it may all be a load of boll**ks, especially if it emanated from Stephen Jones.

Griff wrote:There's no way we'll pull it off.  Even of we had the messiah Eddie Jones or the God-like Gregor Towsned at the helm, we're chucking together a mish-mash of players from teams all ranked below the All Blacks.  There's just no way I can see a series win, regardless of who is/was in charge.

LordDowlais wrote:So, it's a Welsh thing then ?

beshocked wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:So, it's a Welsh thing then ?

Pretty much yes.  Not all Welsh players have been poor though.

Webb and Faletau have been good contributors. Owens too.

I don't think a form XV would have many Welshmen though.

LordDowlais wrote:So, it's a Welsh thing then ?

jimbopip wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

George Carlin wrote:I wonder if anyone will change their mind about this if we actually beat the Chiefs.

FWIW I won't.

Actually, Dave Rennie has won the first battle ahead of tomorrows game. The BBC has a link to a Kiwi paper where the Chiefs team was read out by a 10 year old fan who had e-mailed his selection to Rennie a few weeks ago. Seem s Rennie got back to him, they discussed it and agreed the 23. The lad was then invited in to meet the squad and tell them who was playing. Excellent PR.

From a Glasgow perspective, this bodes well for the next couple of seasons.

Also Stephen Jones, on Twitter, seems to be suggestiong that one Scotland player said "stuff it" to Gatland at the weekend. My money is on Little Jonny.

LordDowlais wrote:So, it's a Welsh thing then ?

Hammersmith harrier wrote:
Davies and Te'o despite playing well individually are the problem for me, they just aren't able to bring the back three into things.

SamTheQuin wrote:Teo and Davies both been playing really well in this series, but in all the games our back three has really been starved of ball. Out of the Welsh back three options Halfpenny is the one who has come out playing very well, am disappointed with North and Williams.

If Daly goes well tomorrow then I wouldn't be surprised to see a back three of Daly, Watson and Halfpenny, might work with the big midfield we have.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:
Davies and Te'o despite playing well individually are the problem for me, they just aren't able to bring the back three into things.

I agree with this. Individually they both played well at the week-end, as indeed did Sexton. Collectively? The back three hardly touched the ball and the backline never looked like scoring a try despite having loads of front foot possession and plenty of quick ball to work with behind a dominant pack.

That has to be a worry for me going into the Tests. I don't think the Lions will win without creating something through the backline.

No9 wrote:Well, if you still want a Lions win, try getting behind them. Its not the players fault, and we should support the coaching team as well as until they lose this series they are there to win it. We should play our part as fans and stop kicking them. There will be a time to do that if they fail, not now...

I don't believe for one minute that the team read this forum, but I bet some have read comments on the BBC and the media which past Lions have been putting their boot in. Those past Lions should be ashamed of themselves. As I said (misquoting Gareth Edwards) ... "Lions don't kick Lions".

All the media and arm chair warriors are doing with their comments is potentially driving  a split in the touring team. Surely they realise how damaging that is.

Griff wrote:

SamTheQuin wrote:Teo and Davies both been playing really well in this series, but in all the games our back three has really been starved of ball. Out of the Welsh back three options Halfpenny is the one who has come out playing very well, am disappointed with North and Williams.

If Daly goes well tomorrow then I wouldn't be surprised to see a back three of Daly, Watson and Halfpenny, might work with the big midfield we have.

If Halfpenny is picked as a test fullback this site will go into meltdown.

Griff wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:
Davies and Te'o despite playing well individually are the problem for me, they just aren't able to bring the back three into things.

I agree with this. Individually they both played well at the week-end, as indeed did Sexton. Collectively? The back three hardly touched the ball and the backline never looked like scoring a try despite having loads of front foot possession and plenty of quick ball to work with behind a dominant pack.

That has to be a worry for me going into the Tests. I don't think the Lions will win without creating something through the backline.

It doesn't help when Murray's passing from scrum half has been so off. Everyone's been going on about his world class kicking but neglecting to pick up on the passing which has contributed, at least in part, to the blunt attack. It stops everything dead. You can't blame the coaches for that. They're not coaching him to pass behind the fly half, above his head, etc.

No9 wrote:

Griff wrote:

SamTheQuin wrote:Teo and Davies both been playing really well in this series, but in all the games our back three has really been starved of ball. Out of the Welsh back three options Halfpenny is the one who has come out playing very well, am disappointed with North and Williams.

If Daly goes well tomorrow then I wouldn't be surprised to see a back three of Daly, Watson and Halfpenny, might work with the big midfield we have.

If Halfpenny is picked as a test fullback this site will go into meltdown.

Why... He hasn't done a thing wrong, the best 15 in the squad now Hogg has gone (I'd actually say he was better to start with, but that will start another torrid of attacks). He is the best option at 15 and has been attacking the line and good in defence. One shirt nailed on is Halfpenny at 15. Funny, as I'd rather see Liam Williams at 15 and Halfpenny on the wing for Wales, but Liam has not turned up on this tour, which is a pity as he was a thorn in the All Blacks side last Wales tour. Maybe he'll have a stormer tomorrow and fight for contention. I'd have Halfpenny, North and Watson as the back three. I'd also start with Sexton, Farrell (if fit) and Davies midfield. I actually think Webb has been the more attacking 9, and will cause the All Blacks more trouble, but if Sexton is 10, I'd go with Murray to start.

beshocked wrote:

No9 wrote:Well, if you still want a Lions win, try getting behind them. Its not the players fault, and we should support the coaching team as well as until they lose this series they are there to win it. We should play our part as fans and stop kicking them. There will be a time to do that if they fail, not now...

I don't believe for one minute that the team read this forum, but I bet some have read comments on the BBC and the media which past Lions have been putting their boot in. Those past Lions should be ashamed of themselves. As I said (misquoting Gareth Edwards) ... "Lions don't kick Lions".

All the media and arm chair warriors are doing with their comments is potentially driving  a split in the touring team. Surely they realise how damaging that is.

On the contrary I'd say it's Gatland driving a split by picking a very small amount of Scottish players and picking far too many Welsh players.

It's easy for you to say get behind the Lions but imagine how tough it must be for Scotland with their paltry representation. They are effectively just there to hold tackle bags.

It's controversial to pick players not based on their rugby playing ability but geography.

England have a sizable representation, we are relatively lucky. Then again being the 2nd best side in the world - representation should be high.

It's easier to unite when we believe the selection is good.

In regards to the pack it's pretty good.

I am also happy to criticise Haskell because I don't think he's been good enough despite being English.

R!skysports wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:So, it's a Welsh thing then ?

Not for most of us.

We will critique the other nations players just as much (Including our own Dell, who should not be anywhere near a lions shirt) - Laidlaw, who we admit is a limited player and is unlikely to be good enough to go to the test.

However, it seems that anything we disagree with, any opinions about how Gatland is managing the tour, Lion players performance (of any nationality) or tactics, suddenly become a Welsh thing.

It gets a little be tedious

No9 wrote:

beshocked wrote:

No9 wrote:Well, if you still want a Lions win, try getting behind them. Its not the players fault, and we should support the coaching team as well as until they lose this series they are there to win it. We should play our part as fans and stop kicking them. There will be a time to do that if they fail, not now...

I don't believe for one minute that the team read this forum, but I bet some have read comments on the BBC and the media which past Lions have been putting their boot in. Those past Lions should be ashamed of themselves. As I said (misquoting Gareth Edwards) ... "Lions don't kick Lions".

All the media and arm chair warriors are doing with their comments is potentially driving  a split in the touring team. Surely they realise how damaging that is.

On the contrary I'd say it's Gatland driving a split by picking a very small amount of Scottish players and picking far too many Welsh players.

It's easy for you to say get behind the Lions but imagine how tough it must be for Scotland with their paltry representation. They are effectively just there to hold tackle bags.

It's controversial to pick players not based on their rugby playing ability but geography.

England have a sizable representation, we are relatively lucky. Then again being the 2nd best side in the world - representation should be high.

It's easier to unite when we believe the selection is good.

In regards to the pack it's pretty good.

I am also happy to criticise Haskell because I don't think he's been good enough despite being English.

Have to disagree... As I have said before, and not going to repeat, as I think it needs to be put to bed... Some players where asked and turned the offer down, as they where only needed for cover. I said this on Saturday, and was laughed at... Its now becoming clearer. I just hope it can be put to bed and the tour can progress... If you are at the top of your game, you wont want to take the jersey to warm a bench. Some of the players selected realise themselves, that is what they are there for and have accepted that. As such, they will help the touring party as they know what's needed of them, rather than pick away at it, believing they are better than the job they have been asked to do. Gats was clear with them what was needed, if they don't believe they can do that, fine, I respect their decision, but would have more respect now if they simply came out and told the world they turned down the offer, so that the tour can get back on track. As for the past Lions criticising, well they have the right to reply, but statements like "devaluing the jersey" is embarrassing to hear from them. How many said that Sir Clive "devalued" the jersey by turning the 2005 tour into a England WC re-union party. Not going to say anymore on this, as I'm starting to rant, and don't want to.... I just want to support the Lions and enjoy the Tests, as this is what tis been building to, and I've been waiting for.

Griff wrote:

SamTheQuin wrote:Teo and Davies both been playing really well in this series, but in all the games our back three has really been starved of ball. Out of the Welsh back three options Halfpenny is the one who has come out playing very well, am disappointed with North and Williams.

If Daly goes well tomorrow then I wouldn't be surprised to see a back three of Daly, Watson and Halfpenny, might work with the big midfield we have.

If Halfpenny is picked as a test fullback this site will go into meltdown.

R!skysports wrote:

Griff wrote:

SamTheQuin wrote:Teo and Davies both been playing really well in this series, but in all the games our back three has really been starved of ball. Out of the Welsh back three options Halfpenny is the one who has come out playing very well, am disappointed with North and Williams.

If Daly goes well tomorrow then I wouldn't be surprised to see a back three of Daly, Watson and Halfpenny, might work with the big midfield we have.

If Halfpenny is picked as a test fullback this site will go into meltdown.

No, I think he is now the logical choice.

If Hogg had been around still and continued his improvement back to form, then there would be serious discussions between them both (about style of play)

I think 1/2p is a very good player, but just wish he was let off the leash more to attack

George Carlin wrote:I wonder if anyone will change their mind about this if we actually beat the Chiefs.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

R!skysports wrote:

Griff wrote:

SamTheQuin wrote:Teo and Davies both been playing really well in this series, but in all the games our back three has really been starved of ball. Out of the Welsh back three options Halfpenny is the one who has come out playing very well, am disappointed with North and Williams.

If Daly goes well tomorrow then I wouldn't be surprised to see a back three of Daly, Watson and Halfpenny, might work with the big midfield we have.

If Halfpenny is picked as a test fullback this site will go into meltdown.

No, I think he is now the logical choice.

If Hogg had been around still and continued his improvement back to form, then there would be serious discussions between them both (about style of play)

I think 1/2p is a very good player, but just wish he was let off the leash more to attack

All of this, but in particular the bit in bold. We need the 2013 Halfpenny now more than ever.

BamBam wrote:

No9 wrote:

beshocked wrote:

No9 wrote:Well, if you still want a Lions win, try getting behind them. Its not the players fault, and we should support the coaching team as well as until they lose this series they are there to win it. We should play our part as fans and stop kicking them. There will be a time to do that if they fail, not now...

I don't believe for one minute that the team read this forum, but I bet some have read comments on the BBC and the media which past Lions have been putting their boot in. Those past Lions should be ashamed of themselves. As I said (misquoting Gareth Edwards) ... "Lions don't kick Lions".

All the media and arm chair warriors are doing with their comments is potentially driving  a split in the touring team. Surely they realise how damaging that is.

On the contrary I'd say it's Gatland driving a split by picking a very small amount of Scottish players and picking far too many Welsh players.

It's easy for you to say get behind the Lions but imagine how tough it must be for Scotland with their paltry representation. They are effectively just there to hold tackle bags.

It's controversial to pick players not based on their rugby playing ability but geography.

England have a sizable representation, we are relatively lucky. Then again being the 2nd best side in the world - representation should be high.

It's easier to unite when we believe the selection is good.

In regards to the pack it's pretty good.

I am also happy to criticise Haskell because I don't think he's been good enough despite being English.

Have to disagree... As I have said before, and not going to repeat, as I think it needs to be put to bed... Some players where asked and turned the offer down, as they where only needed for cover. I said this on Saturday, and was laughed at... Its now becoming clearer. I just hope it can be put to bed and the tour can progress... If you are at the top of your game, you wont want to take the jersey to warm a bench. Some of the players selected realise themselves, that is what they are there for and have accepted that. As such, they will help the touring party as they know what's needed of them, rather than pick away at it, believing they are better than the job they have been asked to do. Gats was clear with them what was needed, if they don't believe they can do that, fine, I respect their decision, but would have more respect now if they simply came out and told the world they turned down the offer, so that the tour can get back on track. As for the past Lions criticising, well they have the right to reply, but statements like "devaluing the jersey" is embarrassing to hear from them. How many said that Sir Clive "devalued" the jersey by turning the 2005 tour into a England WC re-union party. Not going to say anymore on this, as I'm starting to rant, and don't want to.... I just want to support the Lions and enjoy the Tests, as this is what tis been building to, and I've been waiting for.

Erm - everyone?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Didn't really follow rugby as much back then so just typed the first name that came into my head.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.standard.co.uk/sport/welsh-hero-jpr-blasts-woodward-7172462.html%3famp