Warren Gatland 'done' with the British and Irish Lions

by **RDW** Tue 17 Oct 2017, 9:26 am

First topic message reminder :

He's not holding back

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/41645590 wrote:Warren Gatland says he "won't subject himself" to taking charge of the British and Irish Lions in 2021.

The Wales coach led the Lions to victory in Australia in 2013, and to a draw in New Zealand this summer.

But the 54-year-old says he will not take charge for the next tour to South Africa, citing the abuse he suffered and the difficulty of putting a winning team together in such a short time.

The New Zealander said: "I'm done. Let someone else reinvent the wheel."

Gatland revealed he had been "hurt" by criticism from within the camp, notably from Ireland flanker Sean O'Brien.

While the Lions' six-week, 10-match tour of New Zealand ended with a creditable drawn series - the Lions have only won once there in 100 years - a feature of the series was the level of abuse directed towards Gatland.

That included the New Zealand Herald newspaper featuring a cartoon of him as a red-nosed clown.

Speaking on Monday, Gatland said: "I hated the tour. I did. I just hated the press and the negativity in New Zealand.

"When I look back on it now, there were a lot of things that were satisfying and what an achievement it was, but it was tough work. It was hard."

Gatland had suggested he would be prepared to take charge for a third time in 2021, but when asked on Monday, he said: "I wouldn't subject myself to that.

"What I've learned from my Lions experiences is how difficult it is to put some continuity together in terms of people and staff, and the lack of preparation time. Let someone else do it."

However, Gatland said there was "something magical about the Lions" and hopes the game's senior figures will help to preserve that magic - primarily by giving coaches more time to prepare a squad.

"A minimum is having a week in the UK before you go, and then trying to arrive there a minimum of five days before the first game," he said. "That wouldn't be ideal, but it would be adequate.

"That is all we are asking for - adequate preparation - to give yourself the best chance of doing well."

by Scottrf Fri 20 Oct 2017, 9:33 am

LordDowlais wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:
ebop wrote:Gatland drew a series. Woodward came in all blustery and ‘his’ team got smashed. And then he spun a tale with his PR guy. You’re going on about ‘ethos’. But proof is in the pudding.

I can only guess you are replying to 7&1/2. I do not see his posts. Good luck with that one.

But for me the difference between Gatland and Woodward is plain as day.

1. Gatland did not take Alistair Campbell
2. Gatland did not take about a billion players
3. Gatland did not talk the talk without walking the walk
4. Gatland did not turn the tour into a media circus
5. Gatland did not did not turn the Lions into a laughing stock
6. Gatland DID NOT LOSE ANY SERIES TOURS

If Woodward took a billion players Gatland took 999,999,997

As for point 4, he dressed as a clown. The definition of a circus...

Only because of the New Zealand media.

Nobody has ever since taken as many players on a Lions tour as Woodward did, not even close.

How do you create a media circus without the media?

Not even close? Can you even count?

All those points are stupid except from 6. Lets be honest.

by No 7&1/2 Fri 20 Oct 2017, 9:38 am

Not even close? Count the number on this tour. Dear me you make yourself look silly ld.

by Guest Fri 20 Oct 2017, 9:45 am

As far as reputations go

Gatland’s went up

Woodward’s dropped through the floor

by No 7&1/2 Fri 20 Oct 2017, 9:47 am

He has positioned himself for next nz coach.

by LordDowlais Fri 20 Oct 2017, 9:49 am

Scottrf wrote:Not even close? Can you even count?

Gatlands squad consisted of about 33 players, it does go up into about 40 odd when you take into account extras taken to cover for injuries.

Woodwards squad consisted of over 40 players from the outset.

by LordDowlais Fri 20 Oct 2017, 9:54 am

Scottrf wrote:All those points are stupid except from 6. Lets be honest.

Go on then, counter them. I would love to see how in your opinion he turned the Lions into a laughing stock.

by Scottrf Fri 20 Oct 2017, 9:54 am

LordDowlais wrote:
Scottrf wrote:Not even close? Can you even count?

Gatlands squad consisted of about 33 players, it does go up into about 40 odd when you take into account extras taken to cover for injuries.

Woodwards squad consisted of over 40 players from the outset.

Jesus.

http://www.rugbyworld.com/countries/england-countries/warren-gatland-names-41-man-lions-squad-to-face-the-all-blacks-77878

by LordDowlais Fri 20 Oct 2017, 9:56 am

Scottrf wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:
Scottrf wrote:Not even close? Can you even count?

Gatlands squad consisted of about 33 players, it does go up into about 40 odd when you take into account extras taken to cover for injuries.

Woodwards squad consisted of over 40 players from the outset.

Jesus.

http://www.rugbyworld.com/countries/england-countries/warren-gatland-names-41-man-lions-squad-to-face-the-all-blacks-77878

OK, I concede. Well done.

Care to counter any of the other points ?

by No 7&1/2 Fri 20 Oct 2017, 9:56 am

Would that include the guys that were called up as cover as always planned and not as injury cover scott?

by Scottrf Fri 20 Oct 2017, 9:58 am

LordDowlais wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:
Scottrf wrote:Not even close? Can you even count?

Gatlands squad consisted of about 33 players, it does go up into about 40 odd when you take into account extras taken to cover for injuries.

Woodwards squad consisted of over 40 players from the outset.

Jesus.

http://www.rugbyworld.com/countries/england-countries/warren-gatland-names-41-man-lions-squad-to-face-the-all-blacks-77878

OK, I concede. Well done.

Care to counter any of the other points ?

1. Irrelevant.
2. Squad sizes pretty comparable. Woodward's slightly higher.
3. This is just an extention of point 6 which is your only relevant point.
4. Gatland was literally dressed as a clown. Then you blame the media for turning it into a media circus. Okay.
5. He lost to club sides but this is just opinion. Okay.
6. Agreed.

by Scottrf Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:00 am

No 7&1/2 wrote:Would that include the guys that were called up as cover as always planned and not as injury cover scott?

The 41 in the link doesn't include for example Haskell (for Billy V) or Laidlaw (Youngs). Just proving it's not 'about 33 players'.

by beshocked Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:05 am

Lorddowlais

I don't enjoy defending Woodward. He did some good things like obviously building a world beating team but he left an over the hill England squad for Andy Robinson to pick up the pieces.

Sure... and Carter is a rubbish player...

It's the Lions players, primarily from Ireland and England who've helped Welsh players know what beating Australia and NZ feels like!

Yes but the whole point of cover is to use the cover.

Wales' record vs tri nations is atrocious. It is not as if Wales are a world class side with a world class coach.

Some good players, some poor players, some overrated players.

Being ahead of Howley and Mcbride is not difficult.

Scotland came 4th but won 3 games beating Ireland and Wales.

Scotland got destroyed by England but Wales know all about how psychology can wreck a side.

Scotland mentally weak vs England at Twickenham just as Wales are mentally weak vs tri nations.

Yes AWJ was pretty much the weak link.

Well according to SOB, Farrell Jr and Sexton were running the backs moves because Howley was so poor.

Wales need to get rid of Gatland, he's holding you back.

Also Gatland's law is a mess.

Stop changing it!

Doesn't seem to be clear whether you want to strengthen the Welsh regions or not.

Allowing the likes of L.Williams,North and Faletau to play outside Wales but punishing Webb for chasing the money in Toulon.

The funny thing about L.Williams is that even though it's great he's signed for Sarries, he's probably the player who least needed to change clubs.

by LordDowlais Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:06 am

Scottrf wrote:. Irrelevant.
2. Squad sizes pretty comparable. Woodward's slightly higher.
3. This is just an extention of point 6 which is your only relevant point.
4. Gatland was literally dressed as a clown. Then you blame the media for turning it into a media circus. Okay.
5. He lost to club sides but this is just opinion. Okay.
6. Agreed.

OK so I see you are conveniently leaving out point 1.
2. Woodwards was higher, but not by much I will give you that.
3. But he did walk the walk, he only lost one test. He did not get thrashed in all three like his predecessor.
4. That was the media doing it, not Gatland, he also did not dress as a clown, he wore a red nose, to poke back at the media. It's not as if he took a media spin doctor to turn anything into a circus, like his predecessor did.
5. He had his test side standing toe to toe with the best in the world.
6. Agreed.

by Scottrf Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:07 am

LordDowlais wrote:
Scottrf wrote:. Irrelevant.
2. Squad sizes pretty comparable. Woodward's slightly higher.
3. This is just an extention of point 6 which is your only relevant point.
4. Gatland was literally dressed as a clown. Then you blame the media for turning it into a media circus. Okay.
5. He lost to club sides but this is just opinion. Okay.
6. Agreed.

OK so I see you are conveniently leaving out point 1.
2. Woodwards was higher, but not by much I will give you that.
3. But he did walk the walk, he only lost one test. He did not get thrashed in all three like his predecessor.
4. That was the media doing it, not Gatland, he also did not dress as a clown, he wore a red nose, to poke back at the media. It's not as if he took a media spin doctor to turn anything into a circus, like his predecessor did.
5. He had his test side standing toe to toe with the best in the world.
6. Agreed.

No you just deleted the numbering.

by LordDowlais Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:08 am

beshocked wrote:Well according to SOB, Farrell Jr and Sexton were running the backs moves because Howley was so poor.

Well he should have been learning how to tackle and pass before he started doing backs training.

by LordDowlais Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:10 am

Scottrf wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:
Scottrf wrote:. Irrelevant.
2. Squad sizes pretty comparable. Woodward's slightly higher.
3. This is just an extention of point 6 which is your only relevant point.
4. Gatland was literally dressed as a clown. Then you blame the media for turning it into a media circus. Okay.
5. He lost to club sides but this is just opinion. Okay.
6. Agreed.

OK so I see you are conveniently leaving out point 1.
2. Woodwards was higher, but not by much I will give you that.
3. But he did walk the walk, he only lost one test. He did not get thrashed in all three like his predecessor.
4. That was the media doing it, not Gatland, he also did not dress as a clown, he wore a red nose, to poke back at the media. It's not as if he took a media spin doctor to turn anything into a circus, like his predecessor did.
5. He had his test side standing toe to toe with the best in the world.
6. Agreed.
No you just deleted the numbering.

No you have ignored it by just saying irrelevant. I could use that as an answer to all your counter answers.

by Scottrf Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:11 am

LordDowlais wrote:
beshocked wrote:Well according to SOB, Farrell Jr and Sexton were running the backs moves because Howley was so poor.

Well he should have been learning how to tackle and pass before he started doing backs training.

Too busy winning back to back 6N and European Cups to learn how to tackle and pass.

by Scottrf Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:12 am

LordDowlais wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:
Scottrf wrote:. Irrelevant.
2. Squad sizes pretty comparable. Woodward's slightly higher.
3. This is just an extention of point 6 which is your only relevant point.
4. Gatland was literally dressed as a clown. Then you blame the media for turning it into a media circus. Okay.
5. He lost to club sides but this is just opinion. Okay.
6. Agreed.

OK so I see you are conveniently leaving out point 1.
2. Woodwards was higher, but not by much I will give you that.
3. But he did walk the walk, he only lost one test. He did not get thrashed in all three like his predecessor.
4. That was the media doing it, not Gatland, he also did not dress as a clown, he wore a red nose, to poke back at the media. It's not as if he took a media spin doctor to turn anything into a circus, like his predecessor did.
5. He had his test side standing toe to toe with the best in the world.
6. Agreed.
No you just deleted the numbering.

No you have ignored it by just saying irrelevant. I could use that as an answer to all your counter answers.

That would probably help. That way we can ignore the nonsense that is points 1-5 and just agree on the only relevant one, point 6.

by LordDowlais Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:12 am

Scottrf wrote:Too busy winning back to back 6N and European Cups to learn how to tackle and pass.

Yes.

And he did all that on his own.......

by Scottrf Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:13 am

LordDowlais wrote:
Scottrf wrote:Too busy winning back to back 6N and European Cups to learn how to tackle and pass.

Yes.

And he did all that on his own.......

Why do Sarries and England both choose to have a passenger?

by No 7&1/2 Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:14 am

I'm still.amazed at the amount of people not realising Farrell rushing up to cut off the pass out wide rather than tackling the man was an actual tactic from Farrell senior and the coaches which worked pretty well over the 3 tests.

by LordDowlais Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:15 am

Scottrf wrote:That would probably help. That way we can ignore the nonsense that is points 1-5 and just agree on the only relevant one, point 6.

Irrelevant.

Just like what you are posting.

When it comes down to it, Gatlands tours, both of them, were much more of a success than any other since 1997.

But something tells me you will not agree with that.

by LordDowlais Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:16 am

Scottrf wrote:Why do Sarries and England both choose to have a passenger?

For his goal kicking.

by Scottrf Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:18 am

LordDowlais wrote:When it comes down to it, Gatlands tours, both of them, were much more of a success than any other since 1997.

But something tells me you will not agree with that.

No, I probably would.

by Scottrf Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:19 am

LordDowlais wrote:
Scottrf wrote:Why do Sarries and England both choose to have a passenger?

For his goal kicking.

You know Sarries have roughly the most missed tackles and best defence in the prem right?

by No 7&1/2 Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:20 am

For his goal kicking....ld does not get rugby.

by beshocked Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:20 am

Lorddowlais how a team is organised is very important.

Remember Farrell Jr is used to a slick well organised coaching staff at Saracens and of course this has been built over years.

Lions tours are merely weeks and it means that getting players on the same wavelength is not easy.

When you have an incompetent backs coach like Howley this becomes harder.

It makes your basic jobs of passing and tackling harder if you and your team mates aren't working as one.

At Saracens, players like Farrell and Itoje do not make every single tackle, occasionally they'll miss one but it's the strength of the team which means generally if someone misses a tackle or makes a mistake there is someone to clean up the mess.

The organiser/fixer is primarily Barritt IMO.

Both Itoje and Farrell have their strengths and weaknesses but both add a lot to the team but you need others in the team to make up for some of their faults.

It's why the Barbarians rarely do that well in one off games.

by **Rugby Fan** Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:21 am

LordDowlais wrote:...It's not as if he took a media spin doctor...

He took three!

by Guest Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:54 am

2005 was an unmitigated disaster of epic proportions. The Lions ‘ethos’ damn near ruined. It was such a disaster, and spun in all directions imaginable , that people don’t even have an accurate memory of what actually happened. It was a 3-0 humping. But somehow that 3-0 humping only occurred because a ‘single’ player who had never done jackshite against the ABs got injured (and then cried for 12 years). It is crazy to think people are even comparing Gatland and Woodward. Woodward became a laughing stock after 2005.

2017 was a mild success

by Guest Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:59 am

Isn’t it about time a British/Irish coach take over the Lions? Maybe it can start by hiring a home grown coach that has the nuts to coach England, Wales or Ireland. Or Townsend.

by Scottrf Fri 20 Oct 2017, 11:06 am

Woodward is still remembered as a World Cup winner not a Lions loser though.

by LordDowlais Fri 20 Oct 2017, 11:11 am

ebop wrote:2005 was an unmitigated disaster of epic proportions. The Lions ‘ethos’ damn near ruined. It was such a disaster, and spun in all directions imaginable , that people don’t even have an accurate memory of what actually happened. It was a 3-0 humping. But somehow that 3-0 humping only occurred because a ‘single’ player who had never done jackshite against the ABs got injured (and then cried for 12 years). It is crazy to think people are even comparing Gatland and Woodward. Woodward became a laughing stock after 2005.

2017 was a mild success

This 100%. clap

by No 7&1/2 Fri 20 Oct 2017, 11:16 am

Now it's about ethos again ebop? Some nz fans need to get past 2 of their players shocking assault and put it behind them!

by TJ Fri 20 Oct 2017, 11:22 am

I'm still.amazed at the amount of people not realising Farrell rushing up to cut off the pass out wide rather than tackling the man was an actual tactic from Farrell senior and the coaches which worked pretty well over the 3 tests.

Glasgow do the same - they know a man is going to rush up so are in position to cover if he misses the tackle - this leads to high numbers of missed tackles but few clean breaks

by cascough Fri 20 Oct 2017, 11:37 am

For people saying Farrell is a weak link, don't underestimate the importance of goal kicking.

In tight games goal kicking is absolutely vital. In the 2 tight games on this tour, Farrell was exemplary. His range, angles and the pressure of those kicks, just fantastic. Given recent form I don't think the Lions had another kicker in the squad who would have slotted what Farrell did (I'd argue the closest is actually Dan Biggar). New Zealand certainly didn't so actually their weak link was the lack of a top quality goalkicker in tight, pressurized games - rather peversely, Beauden Barrett.

by **Rugby Fan** Fri 20 Oct 2017, 11:41 am

ebop wrote:...people don’t even have an accurate memory of what actually happened. It was a 3-0 humping. But somehow that 3-0 humping only occurred because a ‘single’ player who had never done jackshite against the ABs got injured (and then cried for 12 years)....

The only thing you got right there is how inaccurate people's memories can be of what actually happened. Staggeringly inaccurate, evidently.

by Guest Fri 20 Oct 2017, 11:47 am

Rugby Fan wrote:
ebop wrote:...people don’t even have an accurate memory of what actually happened. It was a 3-0 humping. But somehow that 3-0 humping only occurred because a ‘single’ player who had never done jackshite against the ABs got injured (and then cried for 12 years)....
The only thing you got right there is how inaccurate people's memories can be of what actually happened. Staggeringly inaccurate, evidently.

3-0 humping

You don’t reckon I got that right?

by Guest Fri 20 Oct 2017, 11:49 am

BOD sooked for 12 years, got that right to

by Guest Fri 20 Oct 2017, 11:50 am

And BOD did eff all against the ABs in his career, got that right to

by No 7&1/2 Fri 20 Oct 2017, 11:52 am

You need to just accept the assault and move on ebop. Accept first then you can start to deal with it. Chin up.

by Guest Fri 20 Oct 2017, 11:52 am

3-0

I’ll survive mate

by No 7&1/2 Fri 20 Oct 2017, 11:56 am

It sounds as if you're upset. Still catches in your throat all these years later!

by Guest Fri 20 Oct 2017, 12:02 pm

You mean 3-0 in 2005? No, I’m ok with that. Not so happy with 2017, but Gatland is a better coach than Woodward.

by No 7&1/2 Fri 20 Oct 2017, 12:27 pm

You keep talking about the assault of bod. You just need to accept it's an incident not a reflection on you all. We don't think all kiwis are dirty players.

by funnyExiledScot Fri 20 Oct 2017, 8:30 pm

Gatland has every right to be hacked off. Not so much with the NZ media (he's no choir boy when it comes to media skulduggery and if you dish it out you have to be prepared to take it) but the manner of the criticism from SOB, one of his players, must really hurt. Not that Gatland has anything to prove, his record with the Lions is outstanding, and whilst I don't think he's at the cutting edge of coaching these days, his style and methods are well suited to the format (and has been shown over the last three tours).

As for SOB, I'm confident that over time he'll come to deeply regret his actions.

by mikey_dragon Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:48 pm

marty2086 wrote:

In 2013 the Lions just about beat a poor Australian team and should have beaten the ABs 3-0 as I said before the tour

Oh dear

Whilst most of the criticism from SOB was constructive I feel it's worth pointing out that Gatland doesn't get criticised constructively from any other angle, and usually it's just because he happened to wake up that morning.

by mikey_dragon Fri 20 Oct 2017, 10:51 pm

ebop wrote:
Gwlad wrote:What sad people who turn on their own. Never seen the like of it in rugby but no surprises here.
Unmmm, Gatland is on record saying he’s embarrassed to be a kiwi and thinks we’re all arrogant. So gwlad, who has turned on their own?

That was aimed at the media though was it not? I do find arrogant kiwi's funny, mainly because they all live in Australia.

by Gwlad Sat 21 Oct 2017, 2:36 am

funnyExiledScot wrote:Gatland has every right to be hacked off. Not so much with the NZ media (he's no choir boy when it comes to media skulduggery and if you dish it out you have to be prepared to take it) but the manner of the criticism from SOB, one of his players, must really hurt. Not that Gatland has anything to prove, his record with the Lions is outstanding, and whilst I don't think he's at the cutting edge of coaching these days, his style and methods are well suited to the format (and has been shown over the last three tours).

As for SOB, I'm confident that over time he'll come to deeply regret his actions.

Yes, no lions 2021 for him and the unique brotherhood he joined and betrayed will shun him, he'll become an ebop

by eirebilly Sat 21 Oct 2017, 8:17 am

I don't get the criticism of Gatland. He is one of the worlds best coaches.

He has led Wales to 6N titles and GS's
He has led the Lions on 2 successful tours.
Has not had much success against SH sides but not many do.
Has not had great RWC success but again, there is a long list of top class International coaches in the same boat.

To me, his success as head coach of the Lions is the stand out. Getting a squad full of international players playing very different styles and plays and getting them to form a solid competitive team is excellent. I love the Lions and am very happy to have had Gatland lead them on the last 2 tours, I doubt very much if any other top class coach could have got the same results as him.

by No 7&1/2 Sat 21 Oct 2017, 9:34 am

So for you he's the best coach in the world?

by Sponsored content