Sean O'Brien on the Lions

First topic message reminder :

Although there might now be some headlines saying "O'Brien Blasts Lions Coaches", I don't think there's anything bitter or malicious about what he's saying. Off the Ball has audio here:

http://www.offtheball.com/Sean-OBrien-The-Lions-should-have-beaten-the-All-Blacks-comfortably-enough-new-zealand

He clearly has mixed feeling about how the tour turned out, and is trying identify where things might have gone better. His comments about over training before the first Test echo the criticism made about Graham Henry's tour in 2001.

“The first week, we definitely over-trained on the Thursday and maybe the coaches were panicking a little bit about getting the information into us. On the first week [of the first Test], we had a triple [session] day, [the] lads’ legs were heavy on the Thursday and we were playing the All Blacks on Saturday.

“We did nearly a similar thing in the last week. So maybe it’s more [from] a coaching point of view, in terms of taking lessons. Less is more sometimes on a tour like that, rather than trying to pick things up at the end of the week.

“There was probably no need for that but it’s just the way it was managed. We had said it, at the time, and they pulled back a bit. But it’s just about getting that fine balance between players and coaches and making sure the group is ready to rock.”

O'Brien says Rob Howley was unable to impose himself on the squad, and he thinks the backs were guided instead by Sexton and Farrell. If so, then that may be one factor behind Gatland's eventual decision to play both men together.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2017/09/20/lions-coaching-staff-blame-new-zealand-series-defeat-says-sean/

BamBam wrote:

In completely shocking and unexpected breaking news - Dowlais talks utter bollox

You really do have a rather un-natural addiction to LD. Might be an idea to actually post about the topic for discussion than constantly attacking him.

LordDowlais wrote:

BamBam wrote:In completely shocking and unexpected breaking news - Dowlais talks utter bollox

OK. Now listen. I am getting quite fed up with you following me around this forum and trolling me. It is getting very tiresome. Stop being a keyboard warrior.

Stay well away from me on here, and I will stay well away from you.

How far can you stay? Even with a large screen, each thread is still only an inch away.

You know what I mean.

LordDowlais wrote:

BamBam wrote:In completely shocking and unexpected breaking news - Dowlais talks utter bollox

OK. Now listen. I am getting quite fed up with you following me around this forum and trolling me. It is getting very tiresome. Stop being a keyboard warrior.

Stay well away from me on here, and I will stay well away from you.

I don't know the history between the two of you but BamBam I would appreciate it if you took on LD's recommendation.

Cyril wrote:O'Brien is pretty overrated by some though and a bit of a luxury player.

He squeaks a lot at the breakdown.

I'd say he's a less than reliable witness. The Irish have it in for Gatland and the Lions in general. Ok, it's not Wales Online, but I'd but sceptical.

Id say its more of a case of you having it in for the Irish by the looks of it.

Taylorman wrote:Geez what is it about these BODs and SOBs having a post Lions series SOB about the coach when they don't even lose?  SOB's lucky he didnt march himself and lose the series for them.

If I were him I'd be more concerned about his next match with the AB's where I'd say payback is on the cards, not that I wouldn't encourage that of course.

Oh dear. OBrien would walk into the ABs side. Cane is a nuch dirtier player and the ABs are dirtier in general so you should be more concerned with your own sides poor dicipline.

I'm not following him around, he just happens to start/participate in threads that I am interested in - the Lions/England/Pro14 etc

The fact he keeps spewing utter nonsense all over them is not my fault. If he doesn't like being told his attempts at stirring the pot, or his grand statements presented as fact are a load of crap then he shouldn't post them

marty2086 wrote:I said prior to the series the ABs were there for the taking and I still think its the case and the rumblings post tour seem to indicate that the Lions could have done better

So did I. I agree.

BamBam wrote:I'm not following him around, he just happens to start/participate in threads that I am interested in - the Lions/England/Pro14 etc

The fact he keeps spewing utter nonsense all over them is not my fault. If he doesn't like being told his attempts at stirring the pot, or his grand statements presented as fact are a load of crap then he shouldn't post them

Right or wrong opinions, at least LD is posting about the topic open for discussion. You just tend to post negative comments about him with no relevance to the topic at hand.

Its become very tiresome to be honest.

eirebilly wrote:

BamBam wrote:I'm not following him around, he just happens to start/participate in threads that I am interested in - the Lions/England/Pro14 etc

The fact he keeps spewing utter nonsense all over them is not my fault. If he doesn't like being told his attempts at stirring the pot, or his grand statements presented as fact are a load of crap then he shouldn't post them

Right or wrong opinions, at least LD is posting about the topic open for discussion. You just tend to post negative comments about him with no relevance to the topic at hand.

Its become very tiresome to be honest.

My first post on this thread was nothing to do with him, just my opinion on the OP.

I then responded to his hyperbole about insubordination, at which point he thought that was trolling

I'm awfully, awfully sorry that you find it tiresome

eirebilly wrote:

BamBam wrote:I'm not following him around, he just happens to start/participate in threads that I am interested in - the Lions/England/Pro14 etc

The fact he keeps spewing utter nonsense all over them is not my fault. If he doesn't like being told his attempts at stirring the pot, or his grand statements presented as fact are a load of crap then he shouldn't post them

Right or wrong opinions, at least LD is posting about the topic open for discussion. You just tend to post negative comments about him with no relevance to the topic at hand.

Its become very tiresome to be honest.

It's all over the forum billy.

He tends to pick at parts of what I say and put a negative spin on it to get support from other members on here who are of the same ilk. It is very sapping. Anyway, I am just going to ignore him going forward. It seems to have worked with others on here for me.

Back to the topic.

I do not disagree with what SOB has said. But I do disagree with him saying it. If that can make any sense to you.

LordDowlais wrote:

I do not disagree with what SOB has said. But I do disagree with him saying it. If that can make any sense to you.

I think that he has voiced what many on here have said. Still does not make it right for me.

I also don't really think that Howley is that bad to be honest. On his own I think he would be a poor coach but he seems to work very well with Gatland as an assistant.

Picking apart arguments is part of discussion. If you can't back up your opinion or post misleading.comments etc expect people to be critical.

Rugby Fan wrote:

rapidsnowman wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:Guess its the various ethics taught in Rugby education from one country to another.

Sean could learn a lot about ethics from New Zealand

You would never see a leading All Black criticize the coach after a high profile series. While it's on, though...

Coach John Mitchell, under fire for his leadership of an injury-hit All Blacks rugby team, came under fresh attack Sunday from New Zealand's top try scorer Christian Cullen.

http://www.news24.com/xArchive/Archive/Cullen-attacks-Mitchell-20031019

C'mon!!!! Cullen was out of the team after the end of year tour in 2002!! If you read the article, the attack comes from his book, the same book where he talks about signing for Munster! He was a former AB at this point.

But everyone in NZ knows he should have gone to the World Cup that year....JM had rocks in his head

Christ alive - they were lucky to escape with a drawn series against a team shorn of several key players and now they woulda won 3-0 if only they coulda, shoulda, blah, blah.....this is utter nonsense.

eirebilly wrote:I think that he has voiced what many on here have said. Still does not make it right for me.

No, it does not sit right with me either, I have always been in the mould, that if you have something to say, say it to the person/people. I would not go out telling all unsundry as it makes you look, for want of a better word, a bit bitchy.

eirebilly wrote:I also don't really think that Howley is that bad to be honest. On his own I think he would be a poor coach but he seems to work very well with Gatland as an assistant.

I can see where you are coming from with this, but I have witnessed Rob Howley and his coaching from day one, ever since he was back-up at Cardiff. I never thought he was any good then, and to be put into the role he has now, with both Wales and the Lions, without really cutting his cloth at any other level, being in charge of anything, then I think he has been sharp shooted by the request of the WRU as they want a Welshman in a position of authority along with an outsider.

The worrying thing for me is, when Gatland finishes after the next WC, I reckon Howley is in line to take over the top job in Wales. I can only live in hope that he improves by then. I have also heard stories of him being stubborn and arrogant with his approach, and does not take well to people questioning him.

O'Brien isnt really saying anything particularly outrageous and there is no harm opening up post tour. I also think the Lions should have won the series. It is hardly surprising that it came from an Irish player as no Welsh player is going to be that critical because they have to play with Howley and Gatland in November and dont want to get dropped. Given there were no Scots (in test sides) really it would have to be an Irish and English guy.

Matt Dawson was very critical of Graham Henry on the 2001 tour however, in Dawson's case he made all his comments during the tour.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/2372508/Lions-diary-that-caused-a-stir.html

Collapse2005 wrote:I also think the Lions should have won the series

Based on what?

chewed_mintie wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

rapidsnowman wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:Guess its the various ethics taught in Rugby education from one country to another.

Sean could learn a lot about ethics from New Zealand

You would never see a leading All Black criticize the coach after a high profile series. While it's on, though...

Coach John Mitchell, under fire for his leadership of an injury-hit All Blacks rugby team, came under fresh attack Sunday from New Zealand's top try scorer Christian Cullen.

http://www.news24.com/xArchive/Archive/Cullen-attacks-Mitchell-20031019

C'mon!!!! Cullen was out of the team after the end of year tour in 2002!!  If you read the article, the attack comes from his book, the same book where he talks about signing for Munster!  He was a former AB at this point.

But everyone in NZ knows he should have gone to the World Cup that year....JM had rocks in his head

Sean O'Brien is also finished with the Lions now too. He is 30 now so will probably never play another Lions test.

chewed_mintie wrote:Christ alive - they were lucky to escape with a drawn series against a team shorn of several key players and now they woulda won 3-0 if only they coulda, shoulda, blah, blah.....this is utter nonsense.

I know.

Everybody on here, and elsewhere were predicting a 3-0 whitewash before the tour. I was dreading another tour like 2005. After the first game I feared the worst.

After the second game my optimism was through the roof. I wanted a series win.

After the third game, I was very satisfied that we drew the series against a nation who, to put it bluntly, are miles ahead of anyone in their field when it comes to rugby union. I was also very satisfied that certain players enhanced their reputation whilst touring.

LordDowlais wrote:

chewed_mintie wrote:Christ alive - they were lucky to escape with a drawn series against a team shorn of several key players and now they woulda won 3-0 if only they coulda, shoulda, blah, blah.....this is utter nonsense.

I know.

Everybody on here, and elsewhere were predicting a 3-0 whitewash before the tour. I was dreading another tour like 2005. After the first game I feared the worst.  

After the second game my optimism was through the roof. I wanted a series win.

After the third game, I was very satisfied that we drew the series against a nation who, to put it bluntly, are miles ahead of anyone in their field when it comes to rugby union. I was also very satisfied that certain players enhanced their reputation whilst touring.

To be blunt, it was exactly the challenge that we needed and you guys surpassed local (and possibly home) expectations.

Now if he'd said it'll be a regret of his that they could've done better to give themselves a chance to win the series, then I'd agree.

chewed_mintie wrote:Christ alive - they were lucky to escape with a drawn series against a team shorn of several key players and now they woulda won 3-0 if only they coulda, shoulda, blah, blah.....this is utter nonsense.

Totally agree mintie, I think SOB had a few too many bangs on the head over the summer. The Lions won one test when SBW got sent off.

I think Seanie is getting the Lions mixed up with Ireland, who'd probably have won 3-0 at Soldier Field.

chewed_mintie wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:I also think the Lions should have won the series

Based on what?

New Zealand were over rated at the time. They had cruised to victory in the rugby championship by a min of 20 plus points in every game and people thought they were better than they were. Its obvious now that their competition in that tournament was very very weak, it was obvious to me then too.

I thought going into the tour that the Lions had the players to dominate the ABs in the forwards in every game. I still think they should have as they have been dominated in the pack by NH sides on a number of occasions recently. I think the Lions failed enormously in this area and was pretty disappointing. Perhaps they had over trained?

New Zealand's discipline going into the series was very poor. With guys like Farrell, Halfpenny and Sexton I believe that the Lions could punish them. As expected NZ's discipline wasnt great but I was disappointed how bad the Lions discipline was.

Finally, its pretty obvious that the better NH sides are much better at defending than any of the rugby championship sides except maybe NZ. I think that key to beating NZ is defending really well for 80 mins and winning the breakdown and gain line battles. Having Andy Farrell was always going to give the Lions a decent defense. I think however, Gatland failed to get the best breakdown operators on the field for the Lions.

We were never going to win the breakdown and gain line battle when we had a slow, ponderous carthorse taking up one of the lock spots in the place of some very dynamic, physical players, regardless of how much "leadership and experience" he apparently provided

Based on this report from SOB, Farrell/Sexton were doing a fair amount of leading and experience providing themselves

BamBam wrote:We were never going to win the breakdown and gain line battle when we had a slow, ponderous carthorse taking up one of the lock spots in the place of some very dynamic, physical players, regardless of how much "leadership and experience" he apparently provided

Based on this report from SOB, Farrell/Sexton were doing a fair amount of leading and experience providing themselves

I dont think Jamie George contributed much to the breakdown either. Best would have been a much better option.

I wouldnt be overly critical of Gatland myself though. He did lots of things well and some things badly but still got a decent result as tends to be the case with him.

Bit cheeky to say they should be winning 3-0 but Howley isn't a good coach.

Gatland stuck with AWJ when he probably shouldn't have.

With Lawes-Itoje in the engine room would have had a lot more impact. Would have made the pack much more balanced.

1-1 drawn series is still good though.

Collapse2005 wrote:

Taylorman wrote:Geez what is it about these BODs and SOBs having a post Lions series SOB about the coach when they don't even lose?  SOB's lucky he didnt march himself and lose the series for them.

If I were him I'd be more concerned about his next match with the AB's where I'd say payback is on the cards, not that I wouldn't encourage that of course.

Oh dear. OBrien would walk into the ABs side. Cane is a nuch dirtier player and the ABs are dirtier in general so you should be more concerned with your own sides poor dicipline.

 O'Brien has never been an All Black and never will, Sam Cane has never ever spoken disparagingly of any of his coaches especially in public nor after a tour when the coach is not in a position to defend himself. 

 No All Black ever would, the process is that if you have an issue you raise it with your coaches on tour, and in house, and if you continue then to slant the coach, the coach then has the option of sending you home. these disciplines are instilled in New Zealand kids when they are about 15 years old.

Collapse2005 wrote:

chewed_mintie wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:I also think the Lions should have won the series

Based on what?

New Zealand were over rated at the time. They had cruised to victory in the rugby championship by a min of 20 plus points in every game and people thought they were better than they were. Its obvious now that their competition in that tournament was very very weak, it was obvious to me then too.

I thought going into the tour that the Lions had the players to dominate the ABs in the forwards in every game. I still think they should have as they have been dominated in the pack by NH sides on a number of occasions recently. I think the Lions failed enormously in this area and was pretty disappointing. Perhaps they had over trained?

New Zealand's discipline going into the series was very poor. With guys like Farrell, Halfpenny and Sexton I believe that the Lions could punish them. As expected NZ's discipline wasnt great but I was disappointed how bad the Lions discipline was.

Finally, its pretty obvious that the better NH sides are much better at defending than any of the rugby championship sides except maybe NZ. I think that key to beating NZ is defending really well for 80 mins and winning the breakdown and gain line battles. Having Andy Farrell was always going to give the Lions a decent defense. I think however, Gatland failed to get the best breakdown operators on the field for the Lions.

 Shoulda, Coulda, what happened to Woulda?

aucklandlaurie wrote:Sam Cane has never ever spoken disparagingly of any of his coaches especially in public nor after a tour when the coach is not in a position to defend himself. 

That's because the ABs hardly ever loose and when they do its usually the fault of the chef or some contagious seasonal virus, so no need to blame the coach for anything.

What an absolute bell O'Brien is to come out with something like this.

rodders wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:Sam Cane has never ever spoken disparagingly of any of his coaches especially in public nor after a tour when the coach is not in a position to defend himself. 

That's because the ABs hardly ever loose and when they do its usually the fault of the chef or some contagious seasonal virus, so no need to blame the coach for anything.

 And another reason why the All Blacks hardly ever lose is because they don't have players going around in Public lambasting the coach and the coaching staff.

But even the best new zealand players have been critical of past coaches. I don't see anything wrong with speaking out.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Taylorman wrote:Geez what is it about these BODs and SOBs having a post Lions series SOB about the coach when they don't even lose?  SOB's lucky he didnt march himself and lose the series for them.

If I were him I'd be more concerned about his next match with the AB's where I'd say payback is on the cards, not that I wouldn't encourage that of course.

Oh dear. OBrien would walk into the ABs side. Cane is a nuch dirtier player and the ABs are dirtier in general so you should be more concerned with your own sides poor dicipline.

 O'Brien has never been an All Black and never will, Sam Cane has never ever spoken disparagingly of any of his coaches especially in public nor after a tour when the coach is not in a position to defend himself. 

 No All Black ever would, the process is that if you have an issue you raise it with your coaches on tour, and in house, and if you continue then to slant the coach, the coach then has the option of sending you home. these disciplines are instilled in New Zealand kids when they are about 15 years old.

I doubt O'Brien wants to be an AB player. He is still a much better player than Cane who has a great work ethic but limited enough player.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

chewed_mintie wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:I also think the Lions should have won the series

Based on what?

New Zealand were over rated at the time. They had cruised to victory in the rugby championship by a min of 20 plus points in every game and people thought they were better than they were. Its obvious now that their competition in that tournament was very very weak, it was obvious to me then too.

I thought going into the tour that the Lions had the players to dominate the ABs in the forwards in every game. I still think they should have as they have been dominated in the pack by NH sides on a number of occasions recently. I think the Lions failed enormously in this area and was pretty disappointing. Perhaps they had over trained?

New Zealand's discipline going into the series was very poor. With guys like Farrell, Halfpenny and Sexton I believe that the Lions could punish them. As expected NZ's discipline wasnt great but I was disappointed how bad the Lions discipline was.

Finally, its pretty obvious that the better NH sides are much better at defending than any of the rugby championship sides except maybe NZ. I think that key to beating NZ is defending really well for 80 mins and winning the breakdown and gain line battles. Having Andy Farrell was always going to give the Lions a decent defense. I think however, Gatland failed to get the best breakdown operators on the field for the Lions.

 Shoulda, Coulda, what happened to Woulda?

That's a really intelligent response. Well done.

aucklandlaurie wrote:these disciplines are instilled in New Zealand kids when they are about 15 years old.

I saw a documentary on this not so long ago, I cannot remember who did it, but it was all about New Zealand rugby and how are they so good at it.

There is not much of a difference with what New Zealand do between the ages of 6-14, than what we are doing up here, but as soon as they turn 15, then they are treated as adults. They call the age grade under 15's rugby, and thousands of people turn out for it, and they treat them the same as they would treat a 100 cap All Black, from that age onwards.

They are taught disciplines, rules, behaviour, what is expect of them, and they take that from the age of 15 right through to the end of their careers.

That is the difference.

rodders wrote:

chewed_mintie wrote:Christ alive - they were lucky to escape with a drawn series against a team shorn of several key players and now they woulda won 3-0 if only they coulda, shoulda, blah, blah.....this is utter nonsense.

Totally agree mintie, I think SOB had a few too many bangs on the head over the summer. The Lions won one test when SBW got sent off.

I think Seanie is getting the Lions mixed up with Ireland, who'd probably have won 3-0 at Soldier Field.

Well, he did play against New Zealand rodders...

Sean O'Brien has let the Lions down by publicly criticising the coaches

Total honesty amongst sports stars is a rarity and should be cherished. But finger-pointing, and especially name-checking, does Sean O'Brien no favours.

We have no reason to doubt O'Brien's account and the idea of Sexton and Farrell imposing themselves on training should not come as a surprise. Their leadership qualities were part of the reason both were picked. But to single out Howley like that in public is uncalled for. Finger-pointing at an individual is a big no-no, especially one who has done so much for the Lions cause

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2017/09/21/sean-obrien-has-let-lions-publicly-criticising-coaches/

Trouble is with Howley, is even Welsh supporters know he's a fraud so he's an easy target. But then I wouldn't take back moves advice off Sexton either, or the Lions would've been doing the trusty wrap around all summer.

With regards to Cement Head, I can see why he trained them so much leading up to the first test, especially when he was forced to make changes to his squad after the Chiefs performance. It also seems to be his style anyway, to train them hard. Seems to be a common thing when Team Wales tend to start the Six Nations slow and finish better.

I don't agree with anybody to say the Lions could have won 3-0, if they'd done this and/or that. Think they overachieved with what they did personally and the subsequent AB games seem to back that up.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

rodders wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:Sam Cane has never ever spoken disparagingly of any of his coaches especially in public nor after a tour when the coach is not in a position to defend himself. 

That's because the ABs hardly ever loose and when they do its usually the fault of the chef or some contagious seasonal virus, so no need to blame the coach for anything.

 And another reason why the All Blacks hardly ever lose is because they don't have players going around in Public lambasting the coach and the coaching staff.

Oh so its just the journos that depict them with clown hats and noses?

Started off as an interesting thread this, but then the usual suspects turn up and bitch about Wales - mods happy to sit back and let it happen as per.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

rodders wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:Sam Cane has never ever spoken disparagingly of any of his coaches especially in public nor after a tour when the coach is not in a position to defend himself. 

That's because the ABs hardly ever loose and when they do its usually the fault of the chef or some contagious seasonal virus, so no need to blame the coach for anything.

 And another reason why the All Blacks hardly ever lose is because they don't have players going around in Public lambasting the coach and the coaching staff.

That might be because they have top class coaching staff!

You getting confused with wales and 2 Wales coaches?

Duplicate

Lord Dowlais wrote:

I can see where you are coming from with this, but I have witnessed Rob Howley and his coaching from day one, ever since he was back-up at Cardiff. I never thought he was any good then, and to be put into the role he has now, with both Wales and the Lions, without really cutting his cloth at any other level, being in charge of anything, then I think he has been sharp shooted by the request of the WRU as they want a Welshman in a position of authority along with an outsider.

The worrying thing for me is, when Gatland finishes after the next WC, I reckon Howley is in line to take over the top job in Wales. I can only live in hope that he improves by then. I have also heard stories of him being stubborn and arrogant with his approach, and does not take well to people questioning him.

I will take your word for that on Howley's ability as a coach but I have always thought he was not as bad as made out to be.

Do you really think he will get the full job once Gatland goes? I am not so sure myself, I think he will be in the set up in exactly his current position but I think the WRU will appoint a better head coach.

if Howley becomes Head Coach then i'll stop supporting Wales

I doubt Howley is as bad as people make out.

eirebilly wrote:

Lord Dowlais wrote:

I can see where you are coming from with this, but I have witnessed Rob Howley and his coaching from day one, ever since he was back-up at Cardiff. I never thought he was any good then, and to be put into the role he has now, with both Wales and the Lions, without really cutting his cloth at any other level, being in charge of anything, then I think he has been sharp shooted by the request of the WRU as they want a Welshman in a position of authority along with an outsider.

The worrying thing for me is, when Gatland finishes after the next WC, I reckon Howley is in line to take over the top job in Wales. I can only live in hope that he improves by then. I have also heard stories of him being stubborn and arrogant with his approach, and does not take well to people questioning him.

I will take your word for that on Howley's ability as a coach but I have always thought he was not as bad as made out to be.

Do you really think he will get the full job once Gatland goes? I am not so sure myself, I think he will be in the set up in exactly his current position but I think the WRU will appoint a better head coach.

If you don't want to take our word for it then at least listen to SOB.

if he becomes the next Wales coach I might have a breakdown.

Looks like the Lions management are also not impressed with SOB's words...


https://www.balls.ie/rugby/lions-fire-back-sean-obrien-following-coaching-criticism-374089

Collapse2005 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:I said prior to the series the ABs were there for the taking and I still think its the case and the rumblings post tour seem to indicate that the Lions could have done better

So did I. I agree.

Only one of the tests had a decent referee and look how that turned out. When the two corrupt French referees got involved our worst fears played out as expected before the series. We knew they'd be terrible but what transpired at the end of Test 3 was mind blowing. Was this the 'making our own luck' that SOB mentions? Taking advantage of bent referee decisions and scraping together a drawn series?

When he missed Read being offside you mean?