Should we continue British & Irish Lions Tours?

by Steffan Fri 03 Jan 2020, 8:28 pm

First topic message reminder :

This discussion came up the other day so I thought I would put it out there on here. I am impartial on the subject as I don't really follow Lions tours that much

They make money so I guess they will never be scrapped although I did read the other day after the disastrous tour of New Zealand under Clive Woodward and Alastair Campbell the future of the Lions did look in jeopardy

What is everyone's opinion...rugby tradition that should be kept...or an outdated concept in the modern professional era?

Regards

Steffan

by The Great Aukster Tue 04 Feb 2020, 2:00 pm

maestegmafia wrote:
Khouli Khan wrote:"The reasons why the concept is damaging to club and (pick your) country, is that everything the players have known and worked for is thrown out the window. The selection for the Lions is made at the whim of a selector picking players most have never played for. They are expected to gel with sworn enemies for a few weeks and then resume hostilities when the circus is over. They are trying to understand players whom they have never played with before nor will play with after the tour, and likewise coaches.
When the Lions was only picking amateur players on Five Nations form the players didn't have clubs that paid them to be back in high pressure games in a couple of weeks and they rightly saw the experience as one that wouldn't be surpassed. Now there's the RWC and club glory to fight for, the Lions is not just irrelevant in rugby terms but damaging to everything their usual teams have been building for."
____

Nailed it.

There are many people who say that if someone is against the Lions, or the concept of it, then they're against rugby. I tend to think its the other way round.

Stop living in the past and move on.

No one has sworn enemies in rugby, that football parlance, rugby is about making friends that share your love of the game.that is the ethos behind the lions tours.

We lose that and it’s just another sport with “Sworn enemies” promoted by whoever the latest media a r s e h o l e is that televises the matches.

I'll happily put up my hand and withdraw the term 'sworn enemies' to placate any semanticists among us and adopt the term 'professional rivals' instead.
That doesn't change the motivations though, or perhaps rugby should ban anyone using terms such as enforcer, hard man, beast, brute, or anyone swearing at another player in anger or anyone making aggressive gestures such as sticking-out their tongue or throat slitting? Surely there is no place for such actions in a game that is about making friends?

by The Great Aukster Tue 04 Feb 2020, 2:44 pm

guestalt_physicality wrote:
Khouli Khan wrote:"The reasons why the concept is damaging to club and (pick your) country, is that everything the players have known and worked for is thrown out the window. The selection for the Lions is made at the whim of a selector picking players most have never played for. They are expected to gel with sworn enemies for a few weeks and then resume hostilities when the circus is over. They are trying to understand players whom they have never played with before nor will play with after the tour, and likewise coaches.
When the Lions was only picking amateur players on Five Nations form the players didn't have clubs that paid them to be back in high pressure games in a couple of weeks and they rightly saw the experience as one that wouldn't be surpassed. Now there's the RWC and club glory to fight for, the Lions is not just irrelevant in rugby terms but damaging to everything their usual teams have been building for."
____

Nailed it.

There are many people who say that if someone is against the Lions, or the concept of it, then they're against rugby. I tend to think its the other way round.

Stop living in the past and move on.

No I don't think that's nailed it at all. That has a very naive and outdated idea about how players behave as professionals and as men. You only need to listen to the captains at the six nations launch to see how the Lions bonds the best players together irrespective of nationality. It also doesn't make sense when national teams are made up of 'sworn enemies' at club level. For someone like Liam Williams he will be as close to his Saracens and Lions teammates as he will his Wales and Scarlets Lions teammates. That kind of thinking is living in the past imo.

It would be very naïve of any current player to say anything else about the Lions if they want to be selected - or is that being naïve?

I've no idea who Liam Williams is close to or distant from, but if Williams is close to Halfpenny and it's Saracens v Scarlets does he ease off his tackles lest he hurts his friend? Or maybe he goes in harder on his professional rival if he wants the Test spot? Similarly if professional rivals Sarries are playing Exeter how does Williams interact with Hogg? If his Lions alliances affect him in any way he is doing a disservice to his current teammates, and if Lions participation confuses allegiances, it contributes to under performance. If it doesn't then the players selected for the Lions have to go through the 'professional rival, best buddy, professional rival' cycle if they meet in other games and that is against what they have been taught.

by BamBam Tue 04 Feb 2020, 3:00 pm

One of the oldest values of rugby is smashing the hell out of your opponents then enjoying a beer with them afterwards

I've played against good friends on other teams, and certainly didn't take it any easier on them. I never played at a level where any higher level of selection was an issue, but I can't imagine that I would seek to hurt a competitor or hold off on a tackle against someone who could be a future team mate

Aukster - the question you raise above re Williams and his allegiances to Halfpenny / Hogg - why don't his Wales allegiances affect him in the same way as you think any potential Lions allegiance / participation does

by The Great Aukster Tue 04 Feb 2020, 3:10 pm

No 7&1/2 wrote:It's a professional game which continues for entertainment. As long as there are a lot of viewers and a lot money it will continue. As for rivals etc I think most players just want to make the most money as well. Pretending that the lions are any different to the national teams and clubs for the majority of players is pushing it a bit too.

I agree the Lions is a money spinner and no one's going to kill that golden goose however much damage it does to NH Rugby.

I disagree that the Lions are the same as any other professional side:
They are a fantasy team picked by coaches who have never worked with many of the players before - other than the Barbarians which other side does that?
They are only a touring team
They tour the same three countries to the exclusion of everyone else
Compared to other teams they have no time to develop into a team before they're disbanded
They play against clubs and Test Nations - who does that these days?
They play at least three times the number of games in a normal tours.
They have midweek games, with only a few days recovery time to weekends.

They are an alien concept to modern rugby in everything except their ability to generate cash.

by No 7&1/2 Tue 04 Feb 2020, 4:32 pm

And of course entertain fans. Ticks every box really for the professional era.

by The Great Aukster Tue 04 Feb 2020, 4:57 pm

BamBam wrote:One of the oldest values of rugby is smashing the hell out of your opponents then enjoying a beer with them afterwards

I've played against good friends on other teams, and certainly didn't take it any easier on them. I never played at a level where any higher level of selection was an issue, but I can't imagine that I would seek to hurt a competitor or hold off on a tackle against someone who could be a future team mate

Aukster - the question you raise above re Williams and his allegiances to Halfpenny / Hogg - why don't his Wales allegiances affect him in the same way as you think any potential Lions allegiance / participation does

Lions allegiances are formed in pursuit of enduring individual glory in the context of a temporary team.
Test/club allegiances are formed in pursuit of enduring team glory in the context of enduring individual loyalty.

The Lions is like blind dating, getting married, getting pregnant and then divorced in the space of two months but the couple were already both married to someone else to start with. Whatever happens there's going to be a row and consequences after!

by The Great Aukster Tue 04 Feb 2020, 4:58 pm

No 7&1/2 wrote:And of course entertain fans. Ticks every box really for the professional era.

Does the professional era not have a sustainability box?

by No 7&1/2 Tue 04 Feb 2020, 5:04 pm

Well it's as popular as ever so yes.

by Khouli Khan Wed 05 Feb 2020, 6:31 am

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well it's as popular as ever so yes.

But the Lions isn't though, I get the definite feeling that its popularity is on the wane - and its only entertaining you if you support it.

by No 7&1/2 Wed 05 Feb 2020, 7:06 am

Why is it on the wane. Is it making less money? Are there fewer or more people watching? Aukster doesnt support the lions and even he watches it.

by Khouli Khan Wed 05 Feb 2020, 7:44 am

No 7&1/2 wrote:Why is it on the wane. Is it making less money? Are there fewer or more people watching? Aukster doesnt support the lions and even he watches it.

I said I 'get the feeling it is' - just like I 'got the feeling' that France would be rejuvenated with new players and that S Edwards would make an immediate impact on their defence. Of course, this 'opinion' was largely considered to be rubbish by many on here (no names, no pack drill) - but I was right.

I talk to people, I gauge a mood. Enthusiasm for the Lions is more 'meh' than 'enthusiastic' these days in my experience.

Who knows if revenue is up or if less people are watching? There are three types of lies -- lies, damn lies, and statistics and if your opinion needs a statistician, you probably need a better opinion.

Sometimes, you just 'know'.

by No 7&1/2 Wed 05 Feb 2020, 8:06 am

So based on nothing then. Probably best leave it to are millions still watching and millions being made then.

by Soul Requiem Wed 05 Feb 2020, 8:17 am

So it's better to guess than back up your opinion?

In that case I get the feeling that the Lions makes more money and is watched by more people than ever before. As for the line 'and its only entertaining you if you support it.' People don't tend to watch things they don't 'support' per se.

by Khouli Khan Wed 05 Feb 2020, 8:50 am

Soul Requiem wrote:So it's better to guess than back up your opinion?

In that case I get the feeling that the Lions makes more money and is watched by more people than ever before. As for the line 'and its only entertaining you if you support it.' People don't tend to watch things they don't 'support' per se.

Good for you.

Thankfully, i'm not such a spanner that I would insist on you backing it up, just because there might be a faint hope that I was wrong, and that statistics can prove anything if manipulated for long enough - unlike some people on here.

by No 7&1/2 Wed 05 Feb 2020, 8:57 am

That's fair. So on the only measurable metrics the lions is going strong.

by Soul Requiem Wed 05 Feb 2020, 9:10 am

Khouli Khan wrote:
Soul Requiem wrote:So it's better to guess than back up your opinion?

In that case I get the feeling that the Lions makes more money and is watched by more people than ever before. As for the line 'and its only entertaining you if you support it.' People don't tend to watch things they don't 'support' per se.

Good for you.

Thankfully, i'm not such a spanner that I would insist on you backing it up, just because there might be a faint hope that I was wrong, and that statistics can prove anything if manipulated for long enough - unlike some people on here.

You mean statistics can back up facts? Ignoring them however is real forward thinking.

by Khouli Khan Wed 05 Feb 2020, 9:32 am

No 7&1/2 wrote:That's fair. So on the only measurable metrics the lions is going strong.

Oh its going absolutely bloody amazing it is.

As is an apparent revival in Antique collection. Mind you, it was going downhill a bit until that fox Fiona Bruce started appearing on prime time TV to flog the idea.

by No 7&1/2 Wed 05 Feb 2020, 9:35 am

I dont understand your point there khan.

by The Great Aukster Wed 05 Feb 2020, 1:48 pm

No 7&1/2 wrote:Why is it on the wane. Is it making less money? Are there fewer or more people watching? Aukster doesnt support the lions and even he watches it.

Yes that's true - I watch the Lions in a way maybe similar to how a hunt protester might witness a Hunt. Just because I protest about the damage to the participants, doesn't mean the spectacle mustn't be witnessed.

By looking at the fixture list, there are far fewer matches in recent tours than previously so logically there must be fewer people attending the games. Have the TV audiences gone up to counteract this?
Are the Lions making more or less money? The value of money changes over time so what compound % rates do you use to compare say 2009 to 1974? What about the debit side of the balance sheet, players are getting paid more, there are a lot more hangers-on, fewer matches for both TV and spectators, far more other rugby to get people's attention (and money) too.

So is it waxing or waning?

by No 7&1/2 Wed 05 Feb 2020, 1:49 pm

Well if even you are still watching it must be waxing.

by The Great Aukster Wed 05 Feb 2020, 2:03 pm

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well if even you are still watching it must be waxing.

I've always watched it, so that's not an increase.

by No 7&1/2 Wed 05 Feb 2020, 2:06 pm

So steady then. Still making money. Still be enjoyed by millions.

by The Great Aukster Thu 06 Feb 2020, 12:57 pm

No 7&1/2 wrote:So steady then. Still making money. Still be enjoyed by millions.

So from a statistical sample of one you can infer all that... presumably by your logic if I stop watching, the Lions will crash into financial crisis?

by No 7&1/2 Thu 06 Feb 2020, 1:36 pm

Ha. Are the lions matches selling out? Have the rights been sold for millions? Even you admit that's the case so from a professional sport point of view it's a huge success and brings a heap on interest. Your grumble correct me if I'm wrong is that you prefer your club and country and fair enough; some prefer simply their club and want to have fewer internationals. You insinuate that clubs and country have more a lookup out for player welfare as well: disagree in that view and from past players point of view you can see that clubs and country drop you pretty quickly once you're done.

by The Great Aukster Thu 06 Feb 2020, 2:37 pm

The Great Aukster wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:Why is it on the wane. Is it making less money? Are there fewer or more people watching? Aukster doesnt support the lions and even he watches it.

Yes that's true - I watch the Lions in a way maybe similar to how a hunt protester might witness a Hunt. Just because I protest about the damage to the participants, doesn't mean the spectacle mustn't be witnessed.

By looking at the fixture list, there are far fewer matches in recent tours than previously so logically there must be fewer people attending the games. Have the TV audiences gone up to counteract this?
Are the Lions making more or less money? The value of money changes over time so what compound % rates do you use to compare say 2009 to 1974? What about the debit side of the balance sheet, players are getting paid more, there are a lot more hangers-on, fewer matches for both TV and spectators, far more other rugby to get people's attention (and money) too.

So is it waxing or waning?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ha. Are the lions matches selling out? Have the rights been sold for millions? Even you admit that's the case so from a professional sport point of view it's a huge success and brings a heap on interest. Your grumble correct me if I'm wrong is that you prefer your club and country and fair enough; some prefer simply their club and want to have fewer internationals. You insinuate that clubs and country have more a lookup out for player welfare as well: disagree in that view and from past players point of view you can see that clubs and country drop you pretty quickly once you're done.

The question "So is it waxing or waning?" above is asking whether the financials are getting better or worse - I don't know. Do you have any facts to show they're getting better?

Are you suggesting that clubs and countries should continue to pick players once they are done? Surely if a player is 'done' (as in below standard), then it isn't in the individuals or anyone's interests to carry on?
When have the Lions ever picked a player who is 'done' playing for club and country? At least for those teams the players sign contracts measured in years not weeks.
If the word 'done' means 'injured' then the Lions select guys who are done far more than the player's club. Would Tommy Bowe have been back playing for Ulster three weeks after breaking his arm? For the Lions he was, because the only focus was the next match and nobody cared about the impact on the rest of his domestic season or the next season or Ireland's chances in the next World Cup or indeed the rest of his playing career.

by No 7&1/2 Thu 06 Feb 2020, 4:27 pm

No I don't have the stats for tv audience sponsors ticket sales merchandise. All I know is ita still sought after and makes plenty of money.
In terms of clubs and nations looking after players rheres plenty of disgruntled players out there. There are also very very few players who youd find to say they hadn't played when injured as well.

I suppose you're a bit different to the thoughts that this is antiquated though as youd acknowledge it is about money and that's a key thing for professional teams?

by quinsforever Thu 06 Feb 2020, 9:47 pm

lots of pedantry here

love watching the Lions play, and can't wait to have the time to follow a whole tour, but...

haven't enjoyed Gatland as coach with his over-reliance on gamestyle and team he is familiar with. maybe limit coaches to non-consecutive Lions tours?

something needs to be done about the calendar and clashes with PRL finals. it's a joke. Lions is set on making as much money as possible for its Unions and wants to start their tours as early as possible.

wierdly the direction of travel seems to be that it's only the series result that matters. i think that's a shame, and is antithetical to the whole premise of Lions tours. midweek matches should continue all the way up to test matches and there should be lots of matches. not sure how that squares up with PRL and Pro14 end and start dates but there you go.

by The Great Aukster Thu 06 Feb 2020, 10:29 pm

No 7&1/2 wrote:No I don't have the stats for tv audience sponsors ticket sales merchandise. All I know is ita still sought after and makes plenty of money.
In terms of clubs and nations looking after players rheres plenty of disgruntled players out there. There are also very very few players who youd find to say they hadn't played when injured as well.

I suppose you're a bit different to the thoughts that this is antiquated though as youd acknowledge it is about money and that's a key thing for professional teams?

Can the Lions be called a team though? Where's their home ground?

by Old Man Thu 06 Feb 2020, 11:31 pm

The Great Aukster wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:No I don't have the stats for tv audience sponsors ticket sales merchandise. All I know is ita still sought after and makes plenty of money.
In terms of clubs and nations looking after players rheres plenty of disgruntled players out there. There are also very very few players who youd find to say they hadn't played when injured as well.

I suppose you're a bit different to the thoughts that this is antiquated though as youd acknowledge it is about money and that's a key thing for professional teams?
Can the Lions be called a team though? Where's their home ground?

Barbarians don’t have a home ground either?

by Cyril Thu 06 Feb 2020, 11:40 pm

Both the Lions and Barbarians were set up by and in England (the Barbarians are RFU-affiliated and have GSTQ as their anthem) so we can assume their ‘home’ ground is HQ. They are solely ‘touring’ sides, however, and they mainly exist to give the SH a bit of pocket money (Lions) and their older players (Baa Baas) a bit of testimonial pay-out.

by Khouli Khan Fri 07 Feb 2020, 6:45 am

Old Man wrote:
The Great Aukster wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:No I don't have the stats for tv audience sponsors ticket sales merchandise. All I know is ita still sought after and makes plenty of money.
In terms of clubs and nations looking after players rheres plenty of disgruntled players out there. There are also very very few players who youd find to say they hadn't played when injured as well.

I suppose you're a bit different to the thoughts that this is antiquated though as youd acknowledge it is about money and that's a key thing for professional teams?
Can the Lions be called a team though? Where's their home ground?

Barbarians don’t have a home ground either?

And that's another antique that should be kicked into touch.

by No 7&1/2 Fri 07 Feb 2020, 7:05 am

I'm not sure the fact they've been around a while and they make money is a good reason to stop them.

by SecretFly Fri 07 Feb 2020, 9:27 am

I'm not exactly certain either that making money should the highest ideal by which legitimacy is conferred. After all, drug cartels make tons of money.

Of course, I'm being a little lightheartedly facetious, I suppose, as per usual - but there is a more serious sting in my thinking.
Do people realise how endemic this notion of 'making money' has become in everyday parlance in just about every walk of life.
'Show me the money and they will come', to compound two famous movie quotes.
I mean we're all meant to be part of a new zeitgeist, - more caring, inclusive, wholesome. Less selfish, less shallow, less fake.
But it still all comes down to the money. What I can earn, how I can profit, how to monitise my total existence (bloggers). It's all still money that dictates most concerns, interests and persuasions.

by No 7&1/2 Fri 07 Feb 2020, 10:06 am

Money is the clear argument against the lions being antiquated however. The professional game is to a large degree about money/popularity.

by Khouli Khan Fri 07 Feb 2020, 10:23 am

No 7&1/2 wrote:Money is the clear argument against the lions being antiquated however. The professional game is to a large degree about money/popularity.

Its not my clear argument. To hell with the money. My point of view is that it is often to the detriment of club and country and when you throw in the sick-making false bon homme too, that's enough for me to despise the once noble concept.

by Guest Fri 07 Feb 2020, 10:25 am

I don't think it is the highest ideal when it comes to those two teams. That would be the things like tradition, history, and rugby ethics and culture. And sport transcending politics.

by **LondonTiger** Fri 07 Feb 2020, 10:28 am

guestalt_physicality wrote:And sport transcending politics.

Not an argument I ever like being put forward to support sporting relations. The 1974 and 1980 tours of South Africa should never have happened.

by Khouli Khan Fri 07 Feb 2020, 10:32 am

LondonTiger wrote:
guestalt_physicality wrote:And sport transcending politics.

Not an argument I ever like being put forward to support sporting relations. The 1974 and 1980 tours of South Africa should never have happened.

And although to a large extent the world turned its back on SA in the sporting sense during the years of Apartheid, in recent times it seems acceptable to hold motor racing and other sporting events in the Middle East and China. The human rights records of these countries (and many more) is really bad. Shouldn't we be sending a message to these regimes that what they do isn't acceptable to a global community?

Or is there too much oil in Saudi and too much business to be done in China?

I'm confused.

by SecretFly Fri 07 Feb 2020, 10:35 am

Khouli Khan wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:
guestalt_physicality wrote:And sport transcending politics.

Not an argument I ever like being put forward to support sporting relations. The 1974 and 1980 tours of South Africa should never have happened.

And although to a large extent the world turned its back on SA in the sporting sense during the years of Apartheid, in recent times it seems acceptable to hold motor racing and other sporting events in the Middle East and China. The human rights records of these countries (and many more) is really bad. Shouldn't we be sending a message to these regimes that what they do isn't acceptable to a global community?

Or is there too much oil in Saudi and too much business to be done in China?

I'm confused.

Bang!

I think it's called Freedom of Hypocrisy or something like that in high powered political circles.

by **LondonTiger** Fri 07 Feb 2020, 10:39 am

Khouli Khan wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:
guestalt_physicality wrote:And sport transcending politics.

Not an argument I ever like being put forward to support sporting relations. The 1974 and 1980 tours of South Africa should never have happened.

And although to a large extent the world turned its back on SA in the sporting sense during the years of Apartheid, in recent times it seems acceptable to hold motor racing and other sporting events in the Middle East and China. The human rights records of these countries (and many more) is really bad. Shouldn't we be sending a message to these regimes that what they do isn't acceptable to a global community?

Or is there too much oil in Saudi and too much business to be done in China?

I'm confused.

No you are not.

by **LondonTiger** Fri 07 Feb 2020, 10:42 am

Just as Formula 1 goes to UAE, Soccer to Qatar etc due to money, the Lions will continue to exist so long as there is money to be made (irrespective of whether we think it is right or wrong). however the 2025 tour could easily kill this particular golden goose.

My personal belief is that in the modern era the Lions are an anachronism that really should no longer exist. If it did not exist then no-one would create it.

by SecretFly Fri 07 Feb 2020, 10:53 am

Like I say, if people want it then I'm not going to be writing letters to officialdom to have it banned. If there is an audience, so be it.

But personally speaking, I'd either be for ending it all to let Nations concentrate (selfishly) on their own exploits...... OR..... I'd enlarge the concept entirely - a combination side of ALL Six Nations teams (French and Italian players included) - some kind of workable quota system for equitable representation.....

...... meeting a likewise combination set-up of SH Nations. Three tests. Winner takes all. Once every four years.

by Khouli Khan Fri 07 Feb 2020, 10:58 am

LondonTiger wrote:
Khouli Khan wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:
guestalt_physicality wrote:And sport transcending politics.

Not an argument I ever like being put forward to support sporting relations. The 1974 and 1980 tours of South Africa should never have happened.

And although to a large extent the world turned its back on SA in the sporting sense during the years of Apartheid, in recent times it seems acceptable to hold motor racing and other sporting events in the Middle East and China. The human rights records of these countries (and many more) is really bad. Shouldn't we be sending a message to these regimes that what they do isn't acceptable to a global community?

Or is there too much oil in Saudi and too much business to be done in China?

I'm confused.

No you are not.

Yeah okay, you got me i'm not. Unlike some others I could mention. Whistle

by **LondonTiger** Fri 07 Feb 2020, 11:00 am

Khouli Khan wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:
Khouli Khan wrote:
I'm confused.

No you are not.

Yeah okay, you got me i'm not. Unlike some others I could mention.

Philip Schofield?

by No 7&1/2 Fri 07 Feb 2020, 11:08 am

In terms of if the lions didn't exist LT they wouldn't be formed now...perhaps. however organisations are always looking for ways to generate money and interest. There are always ideas being thrown around, new teams, new comps, new formats. I'm glad the lions are around.

by Khouli Khan Fri 07 Feb 2020, 11:19 am

No 7&1/2 wrote:In terms of if the lions didn't exist LT they wouldn't be formed now...perhaps. however organisations are always looking for ways to generate money and interest. There are always ideas being thrown around, new teams, new comps, new formats. I'm glad the lions are around.

So am I, a trip to the Big Cat Sanctuary wouldn't be the same without them.

by No 7&1/2 Fri 07 Feb 2020, 11:22 am

Can't find the tumbleweed emoji.

by SecretFly Fri 07 Feb 2020, 12:29 pm

Khouli Khan wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:In terms of if the lions didn't exist LT they wouldn't be formed now...perhaps. however organisations are always looking for ways to generate money and interest. There are always ideas being thrown around, new teams, new comps, new formats. I'm glad the lions are around.

So am I, a trip to the Big Cat Sanctuary wouldn't be the same without them.

Some of you boys are in top form recently. Good to see 606 with a bit of life again.

by **Pal Joey** Fri 07 Feb 2020, 12:45 pm

Anyone seen Miaow?

by SecretFly Fri 07 Feb 2020, 12:53 pm

Pal Joey wrote:Anyone seen Miaow?

Sly like a cat, Joey.

by Sponsored content

Poll