cashead wrote:
To be honest, he was utterly awful against England, in a game where he really needed to put on a big performance. I mean, he did, but not in a good way.
Yeah, it's unfair to judge a guy by 1 bad game where the entire team was shit, but the way he was shit-the-bed-like-Spud levels of bad, it probably would've been enough to place that doubt about his temperament for the big occasion for Gatland. If he needed an excuse to not pick Russel, he got one.
Can't disagree but it's the same guy who outclassed dan carter , twice in 2weeks.
Outclassed Dan Carter? Or was on a team that outclassed Dan Carter's team?
Henderson is (or can be) a better carrier than either Gray or Launchbury. That's presumably Gatland's reasoning. Givenhe currently seems to mainly stop when he reaches contact in order to set up a maul/ruck it seems an odd attribute to pick him on but at his best he's head and shoulders about the other lock options in that respect, if not any other.
Hey the media declared that about Finn Russel
I think you have made another point about Gatlands selections, he has went for ball carriers over anything else, Scotland is always light on ball carriers so this helps Gatland pick the more direct players. my wider question is can a team of ball carriers from 1 - 8) with massive centres, big wings and a solid defensive full back beat the all blacks ?
Whatever you say the lions DVD will have a lot of clips of people running into contact
Meanwhile the SRU picks up somewhere in the region of £2m as its financial dividend from Lions Tour profits. As an equal shareholder, there is a straight split four ways between the home unions, irrespective of player representation. And we wont have the same impact on our clubs and national side in the first half of next year.
True, but they also get paid per player, and so the WRU who release Gats for such service will pick up £840k compared to the SRU who'll get just £140k. In a lot of organisations that'd be considered a conflict of interest, not here it seems
Thanks. I'd seen the 70,000 figure quoted in a number of places in relation to player payments.
Having now researched further I see there is an equivalent amount paid to unions to compensate for lack of availability for summer tours. Can see the logic. How do the RFU sort this - do they collect and reimburse to the clubs or is it all tied up in the with PRL agreement?
There will also be compensation to clubs for any injuries incurred on tour - presumably backed off with insurance.
The RFU do collect and distribute to the clubs as part of their agreement with PRL I believe. Whether that's on an equal basis or per player I don't know, if it is equal I doubt Sarries will have many feeling sorry for them
Back to a rugby question.. Would I be right in thinking that the Lions are unlikely to encounter any members (other than fringe) of the AB`s squad until the first Test.?
Tobylerone wrote:Back to a rugby question.. Would I be right in thinking that the Lions are unlikely to encounter any members (other than fringe) of the AB`s squad until the first Test.?
Full squads will be available for the first two/three franchise tour matches. The Blues (first franchise match) have plenty of attacking talent but are prone to doing inexplicably dumb stuff. Basically they're more French than the French. The Crusaders (second franchise match) field the All Black pack and are currently undefeated after seven matches. Though a couple of injuries will render their backline pretty toothless on attack.
Last edited by zer0 on Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
Just add my moan about the selection. Had a watch of the Scotland-Wales game again. With a whopping 11 of the starting Welsh XV in the Lions squad you would have expected them to draw upon all the qualities Mr Gatland talks about (experience, knowing how to win away, knowing each other, mental strength in the face of adversity) and spank Scotland's arse. They failed to do so miserably, but even if they were all out to lunch mentally you would still think 11 Lions vs 2 Lions would mean they had more than enough raw rugby talent to overcome the oppostion. I know I'm probably reading far too much into one game but I feel like moaning.
"Outclassed Dan Carter? Or was on a team that outclassed Dan Carter's team?"
All who have played rugby to any level know that poorer players in stronger teams appear better than they are and conversely it is harder for strong players to perform in weaker teams. Being in a strong team has been a prime factor in the Lion's selection since 1997 (until this year's imbalance ...).
The frustration is that for many years Lions selection of Scots has counted against them due to the results of the national side and the lack of desire/time to develop a squad means that entire tranches of players in the most successful teams go en-masse - further reducing the chances of strong players from less strong nations.
It has been the misfortune of the best Scottish players to have been in a generally poor Scottish sides over a period when the squad development aspects of Lions tours have disappeared in the interests of money making and schedule pressure. Our best players have been overlooked in any 50:50 calls. This has been further exacerbated by recent coaches and selectors being strongly affiliated to specific national teams and falling back on what they know and a pre-determined style of play.
Based purely on form (and to a degree fitness) over the last year I would say that 4 Welsh players merited automatic selection - Webb, Williams, Tipuric and Owens. I do think Faletau is a really good player (a better natural rugby player than Billy V, I think) and should definitely have got the nod. The rest of the Welsh selection IMO were due to familiarity of the coaches and a predetermined style of play for which unfortunately very few of the fit Scots players have the physique that Gatland values above all else. For example if one of the 3 FHs gets injured I really can't see Ford or Russell getting the call - you've seen it repeatedly in his unwillingness to select these types of players for Wales, why would he do it for the Lions?
Matt Ha wrote:Just add my moan about the selection. Had a watch of the Scotland-Wales game again. With a whopping 11 of the starting Welsh XV in the Lions squad you would have expected them to draw upon all the qualities Mr Gatland talks about (experience, knowing how to win away, knowing each other, mental strength in the face of adversity) and spank Scotland's arse. They failed to do so miserably, but even if they were all out to lunch mentally you would still think 11 Lions vs 2 Lions would mean they had more than enough raw rugby talent to overcome the oppostion. I know I'm probably reading far too much into one game but I feel like moaning.
I think the way Gatland sees it these guys have credit in the bank, whether they have bad days over and over again they are still good players, whereas the good Scottish performances are aberrations.
The default is go with the Welsh, but unfortunately had to take the England v Scotland, Sarries v Glasgow and Ireland v ABs games in to account.
Matt Ha wrote:Just add my moan about the selection. Had a watch of the Scotland-Wales game again. With a whopping 11 of the starting Welsh XV in the Lions squad you would have expected them to draw upon all the qualities Mr Gatland talks about (experience, knowing how to win away, knowing each other, mental strength in the face of adversity) and spank Scotland's arse. They failed to do so miserably, but even if they were all out to lunch mentally you would still think 11 Lions vs 2 Lions would mean they had more than enough raw rugby talent to overcome the oppostion. I know I'm probably reading far too much into one game but I feel like moaning.
I think the way Gatland sees it these guys have credit in the bank, whether they have bad days over and over again they are still good players, whereas the good Scottish performances are aberrations.
The default is go with the Welsh, but unfortunately had to take the England v Scotland, Sarries v Glasgow and Ireland v ABs games in to account.
I'm sure Gatland does think his Welsh favourites have credit in the bank, but most would not agree with that selection policy. I'd rather he selected on recent form, not on how someone played four years ago. He will continue to select big lumps over flair players and to keep on playing the limited form of Gatball that has been outdated for a long time. As a coach he has shown no innovation for years. The Lions only won the last series against the worst Oz team in history because about four Oz backs were carried off in the first test, and Beale slipped on his arse while taking a potentially match winning penalty. Gatland's favourite, J. Davies, missed a crucial tackle that led to an Oz win in the second test and was very average for the whiole series - but somehow, in the mythical retelling, he was brilliant on that tour.
Matt Ha wrote:Just add my moan about the selection. Had a watch of the Scotland-Wales game again. With a whopping 11 of the starting Welsh XV in the Lions squad you would have expected them to draw upon all the qualities Mr Gatland talks about (experience, knowing how to win away, knowing each other, mental strength in the face of adversity) and spank Scotland's arse. They failed to do so miserably, but even if they were all out to lunch mentally you would still think 11 Lions vs 2 Lions would mean they had more than enough raw rugby talent to overcome the oppostion. I know I'm probably reading far too much into one game but I feel like moaning.
I think the way Gatland sees it these guys have credit in the bank, whether they have bad days over and over again they are still good players, whereas the good Scottish performances are aberrations.
The default is go with the Welsh, but unfortunately had to take the England v Scotland, Sarries v Glasgow and Ireland v ABs games in to account.
I'm sure Gatland does think his Welsh favourites have credit in the bank, but most would not agree with that selection policy. I'd rather he selected on recent form, not on how someone played four years ago. He will continue to select big lumps over flair players and to keep on playing the limited form of Gatball that has been outdated for a long time. As a coach he has shown no innovation for years. The Lions only won the last series against the worst Oz team in history because about four Oz backs were carried off in the first test, and Beale slipped on his arse while taking a potentially match winning penalty. Gatland's favourite, J. Davies, missed a crucial tackle that led to an Oz win in the second test and was very average for the whiole series - but somehow, in the mythical retelling, he was brilliant on that tour.
This. Esp about the last lions tour about which much shite has been spouted, happy as I was to see them beat Oz.
Gats limitations as a coach have been much described, so lets not get our panties all bunched up about it all over again.
The selections work well for Scotland in that we can send a proper development team away on tour whilst watching the lions get man shamed the length and breadth of NZ. I'll still be supporting the Lions, but lets be honest, Gatland isn't going to achieve anything worth achieving this summer, except for 40 players who will each have a chapter to put in their autobiographies, and some Lions goodies to give away.
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
It was so much easier to blame Them. It was bleakly depressing to think They were Us. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.
Lizard wrote:So given that Shag has dissed "Warrenball" in the press, will Gats double down on it, or try a different game plan?
That will never happen, he has picked a very large squad which lacks the ability to run around a man, he has to play gatball, but he doesnt care because he gets to tell the majority of his wales team they are world class, gets an inside look at the bests english and irish players that he might get in the WC and have another look at NZ who he might get in the world cup.
Interesting listening to Big Jim on the rugby pod. He reckons AWJ is 50/50 to tour and that Ryan or Charteris will be next up. He also thought FBrown was close.
Goode was pretty scathing of Russell. Said he choked v England and Sarries.
zer0 wrote:Full squads will be available for the first two/three franchise tour matches. The Blues (first franchise match) have plenty of attacking talent but are prone to doing inexplicably dumb stuff. Basically they're more French than the French. The Crusaders (second franchise match) field the All Black pack and are currently undefeated after seven matches. Though a couple of injuries will render their backline pretty toothless on attack.
To add to this, the Maori are now set to receive All Black reinforcements.
The torrid British and Irish Lions tour of New Zealand just got tougher, with New Zealand Maori set to be bolstered by All Blacks for their match against the tourists in Rotorua.
Just as they did in Chicago last year before the test against Ireland, it is understood the All Blacks will again release players within the 33-man squad not needed for their warm-up match, expected to be against Samoa in Auckland on June 16.
In Chicago the Maori team which thrashed the USA 54-7 included All Blacks Elliot Dixon, Tawera Kerr-Barlow, Rieko Ioane, Damian McKenzie and Kane Hames.
All five could again be released for the Maori team hell bent on repeating their memorable and historic 19-13 triumph over the Lions in Hamilton in 2005 under Matt Te Pou. This time around the Lions and Maori match is one day after the All Blacks are due to take on Samoa.
There is also a chance Nehe Milner-Skudder, who is still struggling to bear weight on his broken foot, could feature if he does not recover in time to make the initial All Blacks squad.
In what is sure to be an emotionally-charged occasion, Colin Cooper's stacked Maori team is likely to feature former All Blacks blindside and Chiefs centurion Liam Messam, along with James Lowe, Akira Ioane, Matt Proctor and possibly Charlie Ngatai who made his long-awaited return from concussion after a year out of the game in Waikato club rugby on Saturday. Even if it is not Kerr-Barlow released, Aaron Smith and TJ Perenara both qualify for the Maori.
Keep in mind that this is not without precedent, as the 2005 Maori All Blacks team had first-choice privileges in the build-up to the Lions game, with Graham Henry being asked not to select any Maori players for the initial squad to play Fiji in the warm-up game.
I'm a god
How can you kill a god?
Shame on you, sweet Nerevar
Right choice by Youngs and then the right choice to call up Laidlaw. Always been impressed by how Laidlaw conducts himself and would not be surprised if he has already been in touch with the Youngs. Seems like that kind of guy.
