Ch-ch-changes? Your team for the 2nd Test

[iLovett]

Boy would Billy V have made a difference to that first test... sure his cousin Toby is a better technical player, but we needed to make more impact down the middle... the NZ defence just wasn't sucked in.

We need identifiers spotting and communicating when the Blacks fwds don't pile into rucks/mauls to get the ball out quicker and plough down the middle... only then will our linebreaks be more fruitful

In order to make impact down the middle you need to pass the ball rather than kick it.

As I'm sure you well know, a balance is needed.

My point is that Billy would have done a little more trucking pulling in a few more defenders, facilitating a wider game... if the blacks keep out wide, pick and go up the middle. Losing some of the gainline contact (that billy would have undopubtedly won a little more of) keeps the blacks back, as it was, we were often consumed by a progressive line

[Mikey Brown]

Please bring the Hask in.

Hang on, is this sarcasm? You're not terrified of his jittery, upright "impact carrying" or his new-found ability to play lock (?!?!?!?!?!?) at test level vs New Zealand, in New Zealand?

[ALunpg]

I agree with replacing AWJ but additionally I believe it should be both locks with Lawes and Itoje in and with Kruis on the bench but will accept Lawes on the bench.

As for back 3 they need to up their defensive game as they created one and let in three. I would not change them as they can offer the most potent attack but a real rollicking is in order.

But the whole shooting match relies on better performance in two key places ..the contact area and kicking.

We were too slow at the contact area on both sides of the ball in defence and attack.We didn't create fast first phase enough as the AB capability to realign is superb the only chance is to push them three or four phases of speed and even then it will be blydu hard .
So do you say let's go attack them ..if so Tipuric and O'Brien with Warburton or Stander on the bench.If not start as we did.

Then...we come to the box kicking. ... there is no disguise to it ..no suprise to it and guess what some of the chasing was substandard so why do it so damn much !!!. I wouldn't mind if we set it up then didn't do it it may catch someone unawares. at the present it has few virtues.

Neither Sexton nor Farrell have looked the part at 10 it looks laboured and plodding. It's a sign of the lack of performance that even Biggar looks in line

So I would say role the dice and put Sexton to start and Russel on the bench ..but from my understanding sadly for Russel he will be on a plane Wednesday unless someone gets injured along with the other bench warmers brought over.

So it will be Sexton to start and Farrell to come on at 10.

It is all fixable ..but it comes down to execution ..we didn't execute some of the basics rIght and our stupid penalty count was as bad as it has been all tour and lastly . somehow...we need to take the right options and not panic. ..but that is easy to write anharder to do..

There is one thing for sure if the Lions do not up the performance at the contact area and the defence it could be a long day at the office as Barrett will play at 10 for the match and pull those strings to greater effect .

[Numbers]

I see some of the papers are saying that Itoje and Warburton will come in which seems fair enough to me.

Yup. AWJ's experience doesn't provide enough weight to miss out the dynamism that Itoje brings. I'm not sure that AWJ should be in the bench either.

I like all 3 back row players individually, but as a unit they just didn't work on Saturday. Faletau is a class act and whilst you could argue that Stander will bring in driving play, Faletau can do the same but the point is that to do that, they cant be trying to shore up the breakdown to such a large degree. SOB can make a dent but seemed less effective at the ruck than someone like Warburton. As harsh as it seems, POM (who I rate highly) is probably the person to make way for Warburton. The question is then what do you want off the bench? A big carrying capability (Stander or perhaps SOB if POM starts) or Tipuric.

I'd be tempted to leave the backline alone. Farrell wasn't great on Saturday, but has been in decent form during the tour, more so than Sexton of late. If the pack can give him better ball, will he play better -of course. I'm not convinced by the playing of both flyhalves at the same time - it works when the pack is dominant, but we are unlikely to have that level of dominance in a test match.

There was some speculation in the Western Mail about Gatland dropping WIlliams for Halfpenny. I really hope he doesn't. All of the back 3 made some mistake, but frankly it was an error ridden performance across the team and the back 3 caused the ABs some real problems. Brining in Halfpenny to shore up defence isn't going to win us any games.

I felt a bit sorry for AWJ, he took a heavy knock early on and should perhaps have gone for an assessment, I thought he was no worse than Kruis who did some things well but turned the ball over at least twice in contact and was not sued as imposingly in the lineout to make him an essential starter.

Daly had a mixed bag, excellent slow up and then accelerate on the outside for the first Lions try, poor positioning for the ABs first try and gassed for the third try, not sure if North would have scored the first try, quite possibly up against Israel Dagg who isn't the biggest, hopefully we'll see one of the wingers on the bench for Saturday depending how they play tomorrow.

Watson and Williams played well, a couple of mistakes from Williams, notably for the third try when he failed to catch the ball coming over his shoulder, but also a couple of crucial turnovers from him.

The front row went ok, George being the standout, with Mako and Furlong getting through a lot of grunt, O'Brien was good in the loose not great at the breakdown.

Halfbacks were ok, centres were good.

[Numbers]

We've got Northern Hemisphere refs for the next two tests so hopefully that will have a bearing on the penalty count.

[Cameo]

It's so often the case that any number of the stats say one was competitive with and even better than NZ, and yet somehow there's always the scoreboard

true, its just interesting that we created maybe more chances than it seemed at the time; we dominated the lineout too, had respectable tackle stats. Yet we ceded too many turnovers and the tackle line...and possession.

I think the tackle line one is the key. Yeah, they didnt make many clean breaks but the All Blacks were making ground everytime they had the ball. Their attack was very very good up to about 10 metres out. Their tries were clinical but I think that generally they will be frustrated that they left points out there

[Banquo]

It's so often the case that any number of the stats say one was competitive with and even better than NZ, and yet somehow there's always the scoreboard

true, its just interesting that we created maybe more chances than it seemed at the time; we dominated the lineout too, had respectable tackle stats. Yet we ceded too many turnovers and the tackle line...and possession.

I think the tackle line one is the key. Yeah, they didnt make many clean breaks but the All Blacks were making ground everytime they had the ball. Their attack was very very good up to about 10 metres out. Their tries were clinical but I think that generally they will be frustrated that they left points out there

yep, their attacking the tackle line with offloads was exceptional

[Sandydragon]

We've got Northern Hemisphere refs for the next two tests so hopefully that will have a bearing on the penalty count.

Particularly with the rolling maul.

[Numbers]

We've got Northern Hemisphere refs for the next two tests so hopefully that will have a bearing on the penalty count.

Particularly with the rolling maul.

Aye, I thought the ball had already been handed back on a couple of occassions when the ABs decided to drop it and Peyper said it was ok as they had tackled the man with the ball, later on, after I suspect a word in his ear from our captain, he stated to the ABs that they must tackle immediately for it to be legal i.e. before the ball has been handed back by the lineout taker otherwise it'll be a penalty as the maul has formed

If we could get that going it would be a huge advantage (iirc we did get one penalty from a rolling maul but I think it was because they didn't let Faletau land before making contact)

[ALunpg]

We've got Northern Hemisphere refs for the next two tests so hopefully that will have a bearing on the penalty count.

Particularly with the rolling maul.

Aye, I thought the ball had already been handed back on a couple of occassions when the ABs decided to drop it and Peyper said it was ok as they had tackled the man with the ball, later on, after I suspect a word in his ear from our captain, he stated to the ABs that they must tackle immediately for it to be legal i.e. before the ball has been handed back by the lineout taker otherwise it'll be a penalty as the maul has formed

If we could get that going it would be a huge advantage (iirc we did get one penalty from a rolling maul but I think it was because they didn't let Faletau land before making contact)

Yep the AB were very street wise and who is to blame them...no one pinged so it was legal...the interpretation did not improve until much later ..but Roman Poitte was the touch judge staring at it and he did not do a lot ...so I will not hold my breath..

As for AWJ yes he is getting a lot of stick...but for me it's more we need a change up ...give the AB defence a differant problem to solve.

Now all this said as a long time follower of Gatlands selection ..he will may say ..the boys need a chance to redeem themselves ..so same 23 but some swap arounds.

Aso an interesting part .. from what I understood from last times post selection meeting interview was how much deliberation there was over maybe guessing say 5 to maybe 6 positions 1.5 hrs is a lot of debate so for sure ...it is a selection team as much as it is Gatland.

[Cameo]

We've got Northern Hemisphere refs for the next two tests so hopefully that will have a bearing on the penalty count.

Particularly with the rolling maul.

Aye, I thought the ball had already been handed back on a couple of occassions when the ABs decided to drop it and Peyper said it was ok as they had tackled the man with the ball, later on, after I suspect a word in his ear from our captain, he stated to the ABs that they must tackle immediately for it to be legal i.e. before the ball has been handed back by the lineout taker otherwise it'll be a penalty as the maul has formed

If we could get that going it would be a huge advantage (iirc we did get one penalty from a rolling maul but I think it was because they didn't let Faletau land before making contact)

It also depends on how many ABs are pulling it down. If the first man to contact the maul pulls it down in more or less one movement, then it doesnt matter if the catcher manages to tranfer the ball back halfway through going down (or if he does it before contact then it is just old fashioned obstruction). Agree though, different refs give it different amounts of time before calling it a maul.

Thought generally Peyper was decent though as he wasnt hugely noticeable

[ALunpg]

Your right about interpretation, the referee is the sole interpreter of the law . I don't fully agree with his interpretation of some of the sackings but hey ..that's just me

As a positive he and the touch judges did monitor the offside line because that is a game killer.

But all in all not a bad performance considering there can be polar differences in the differant intepretation in each of the hemispheres.

[Eugene Wrayburn]

Particularly with the rolling maul.

Aye, I thought the ball had already been handed back on a couple of occassions when the ABs decided to drop it and Peyper said it was ok as they had tackled the man with the ball, later on, after I suspect a word in his ear from our captain, he stated to the ABs that they must tackle immediately for it to be legal i.e. before the ball has been handed back by the lineout taker otherwise it'll be a penalty as the maul has formed

If we could get that going it would be a huge advantage (iirc we did get one penalty from a rolling maul but I think it was because they didn't let Faletau land before making contact)

It also depends on how many ABs are pulling it down. If the first man to contact the maul pulls it down in more or less one movement, then it doesnt matter if the catcher manages to tranfer the ball back halfway through going down (or if he does it before contact then it is just old fashioned obstruction). Agree though, different refs give it different amounts of time before calling it a maul.

Thought generally Peyper was decent though as he wasnt hugely noticeable

I was just about to make the same point. We can't transfer before contact. And as long as there's only 1 of their men in there's no maul and he can sack away.

[Sandydragon]

Particularly with the rolling maul.

Aye, I thought the ball had already been handed back on a couple of occassions when the ABs decided to drop it and Peyper said it was ok as they had tackled the man with the ball, later on, after I suspect a word in his ear from our captain, he stated to the ABs that they must tackle immediately for it to be legal i.e. before the ball has been handed back by the lineout taker otherwise it'll be a penalty as the maul has formed

If we could get that going it would be a huge advantage (iirc we did get one penalty from a rolling maul but I think it was because they didn't let Faletau land before making contact)

It also depends on how many ABs are pulling it down. If the first man to contact the maul pulls it down in more or less one movement, then it doesnt matter if the catcher manages to tranfer the ball back halfway through going down (or if he does it before contact then it is just old fashioned obstruction). Agree though, different refs give it different amounts of time before calling it a maul.

Thought generally Peyper was decent though as he wasnt hugely noticeable

Aye, in that instance it's just a tackle. To be fair to Peyper, many refs would have yellow carded Teo for his tackle on SBW, or worse, so it's rarely worth blaming the ref, even if they are inconsistent, I.e. human.

[Stom]

I've finished the game, and I had a few thoughts. From an individual player perspective, it's hard to judge, but I worry about SOB and JD from an awareness perspective, and about Furlong, AWJ, POM from keeping up with the game. I also thought Daly did not do enough. Watson and Williams were both effective despite errors from both (it doesn't help when you're trying to force things).

I'm not a fan of the two Irish props, sorry... McGrath got shunted up his own ass at scrum time, and Furlong is one of the slowest back on his feet after every ruck.

So, for me:

Mako
George
Cole
Itoje
Kruis
Warburton
Tipuric
Faletau
Murray
Sexton
Williams
Te'o
Joseph
Watson
Halfpenny

Owens, Marler, Sinckler, Lawes/Henderson, Stander, Webb, Farrell, Daly

I'm unenthused with 1/2p at FB, but I don't see many choices in the back 3, tbh, and I did not think Daly was good enough to hang onto his shirt. Maybe he is, and we keep the back3 as is... Farrell was shunt, and to take Te'o off instead of him was crazy, I felt so sorry for Sexton: he kept looking for the pass, and there was nothing on for him anymore.

[morepork]

You are in bad need of a quick, skillful outside back. Or two.

[Stom]

You are in bad need of a quick, skillful outside back. Or two.

We have them, if not the gameplan to use them...

Sure, none are as quick as Ioane, but not many are.

[Digby]

You are in bad need of a quick, skillful outside back. Or two.

We have them, if not the gameplan to use them...

Sure, none are as quick as Ioane, but not many are.

Also we lost the game in the tackle collisions one out and at the breakdown, which is tough couple of points to bring the outside backs to task over

[Sandydragon]

You are in bad need of a quick, skillful outside back. Or two.

We have them, if not the gameplan to use them...

Sure, none are as quick as Ioane, but not many are.

Also we lost the game in the tackle collisions one out and at the breakdown, which is tough couple of points to bring the outside backs to task over

I wouldn't blame the backs too much, they had poor possession for much of the match. My biggest criticism is the lack of composure some displayed, but that was a down side of the entire XV.

I'm stunned that our best player, JD2, is potentially dropped out of the squad. Perhaps one of he most underrated players in modern rugby.

[Digby]

We have them, if not the gameplan to use them...

Sure, none are as quick as Ioane, but not many are.

Also we lost the game in the tackle collisions one out and at the breakdown, which is tough couple of points to bring the outside backs to task over

I wouldn't blame the backs too much, they had poor possession for much of the match. My biggest criticism is the lack of composure some displayed, but that was a down side of the entire XV.

I'm stunned that our best player, JD2, is potentially dropped out of the squad. Perhaps one of he most underrated players in modern rugby.

I like JD, but I thought he was poor on Saturday. Maybe he was supposed to be the shooter in defence, but I struggle with the idea that running up and missing everyone is actually helpful enough. Hadn't heard about him being dropped mind

[morepork]

You are in bad need of a quick, skillful outside back. Or two.

We have them, if not the gameplan to use them...

Sure, none are as quick as Ioane, but not many are.

ll of the Lions chances at scoring came from counter attack. K Ioane is not just fast, he is aware of what is happening.

[Timbo]

The fact the Lions were most dangerous on counter attack/unstructured play would suggest they do have several quick, skillful outside backs. Our phase play and structured attack being crap suggests the game plan and coaching is more of an issue.

Have the Lions executed one strike move off first phase all tour? I can't recall seeing one.

[Stom]

We have them, if not the gameplan to use them...

Sure, none are as quick as Ioane, but not many are.

Also we lost the game in the tackle collisions one out and at the breakdown, which is tough couple of points to bring the outside backs to task over

I wouldn't blame the backs too much, they had poor possession for much of the match. My biggest criticism is the lack of composure some displayed, but that was a down side of the entire XV.

I'm stunned that our best player, JD2, is potentially dropped out of the squad. Perhaps one of he most underrated players in modern rugby.

JD was never our best player. He was not bad, I'd give him a pass, but he wasn't our best player. And he's never underrated. It's like when any English fans say Mike Brown is/was underrated. Maybe, but the fact he cannot pass to a high enough standard drags him down. The same is true of Davies. If you cannot consistently pass to a high standard and be aware of your immediate passing and support options, you have no place in the best of the best of B&I.

There was one glaring case of him "supporting" SOB, when SOB was turned over. That never should have happened: he should have been there to hit that ruck. Or, actually he shouldn't, because he should have been there for an offload, but that's a different problem. He did it again with Murray, when we should have scored: he just was nowhere near a supporting position. He should have been on the shoulder ready for a pass, but he was nowhere close.

Now. he was by far not the worst offender, so don't get me wrong, I've got a big downer on all our backs bar Williams and Watson after that shoite show, but these are bloody basics. And NZ do them perfectly. They are the one major difference between us.

On dropping him, I do not feel the Lions defensive plans can/will ever work against NZ. They play around the idea of supporting each other. Whenever someone makes a break, there are minimum 2 players close by. So if someone comes close to the gainline, cutting off his wide pass is not going to stop the half break: he will have 2 options close in. In fact, all it does is take a defender out of the game.

In the second half, JD was exposed time and again for overrunning defence. I didn't pull him up on it because it's not his individual fault, it's the system. But it does not work against teams who support the ball carrier effectively. All that happened was JD, or sometimes Farrell after Sexton came on, stepped out, SBW or ALB hit a close by suppport runner instead of flinging a pass to Ioane, and NZ were through a half gap and past the gainline, leaving JD out of the game, and needing to scramble back. It was infuriating, and one of the main reasons NZ could get so much quick ball: we were constantly 1 man down.

Joseph's drift is one of the best in the business. He can pass and he's aware. I see no reason to pick Davies over him unless you're looking for a big hit tackler for a system that I believe does not work against the best. So that is why I would pick Joseph: I want a 13 who can pass, who is aware of supporting options both with and without the ball, and I want to change defensive alignment.

[Stom]

You are in bad need of a quick, skillful outside back. Or two.

We have them, if not the gameplan to use them...

Sure, none are as quick as Ioane, but not many are.

ll of the Lions chances at scoring came from counter attack. K Ioane is not just fast, he is aware of what is happening.

Ioane is fast as fook. Sure, Daly was caught flat footed by Williams' crazy miss, but to burn him like that shows he has plenty of gas in the tank: Daly is no slouch. I would go so far to say Ioane is the fastest player on either squad.

[Banquo]

The fact the Lions were most dangerous on counter attack/unstructured play would suggest they do have several quick, skillful outside backs. Our phase play and structured attack being crap suggests the game plan and coaching is more of an issue.

Have the Lions executed one strike move off first phase all tour? I can't recall seeing one.

Nope, its a shocker. Every thing you see/read says how important strike moves are...yet...