2017 Lions Tour
Discussion
PhilboSE said:
hornetrider said:
++
Faletau
Moriarty
Sinckler
T'Eo
+
Tipuric
Farrell
--
Hogg
Sexton
The rest - average.
But a W is a W.
You are Keith Woods AICMFP!Faletau
Moriarty
Sinckler
T'Eo
+
Tipuric
Farrell
--
Hogg
Sexton
The rest - average.
But a W is a W.
Completely agree.
DocJock said:
As hornetrider says, the Maori match will see the test side.
Which means they have all of two games to sort the Test Side! Pretty sure Gatland has said everyone gets a start in the first three games which at 10 means Dan Biggar and Farrell get the next two starts. The schedule is nuts in so many ways but what they definitely should have done is made the Chiefs game which is the midweek game between the Maori and the First Test a weekend game.....that gives you three warm up games to have a proper look plus an extra settler i.e. The Chiefs game and then the AB's.
Only 60 odd hours til the next game.....
Lions team to face the Blues.
Halfpenny; Nowell, Payne, Henshaw, Daly; Biggar, Webb; McGrath, Owens (captain), Cole, Itoje, Lawes, Haskell, Tipuric, Stander
Replacements: Best, Marler, Sinckler, Henderson, O'Mahony, Laidlaw, Sexton, L Williams
Not a bad looking side that actually. Back row a bit lightweight maybe.
Blues will have several ABs, I expect this to be a tough test.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/40156259
Halfpenny; Nowell, Payne, Henshaw, Daly; Biggar, Webb; McGrath, Owens (captain), Cole, Itoje, Lawes, Haskell, Tipuric, Stander
Replacements: Best, Marler, Sinckler, Henderson, O'Mahony, Laidlaw, Sexton, L Williams
Not a bad looking side that actually. Back row a bit lightweight maybe.
Blues will have several ABs, I expect this to be a tough test.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/40156259
hornetrider said:
Lions team to face the Blues.
Halfpenny; Nowell, Payne, Henshaw, Daly; Biggar, Webb; McGrath, Owens (captain), Cole, Itoje, Lawes, Haskell, Tipuric, Stander
Replacements: Best, Marler, Sinckler, Henderson, O'Mahony, Laidlaw, Sexton, L Williams
Not a bad looking side that actually. Back row a bit lightweight maybe.
Blues will have several ABs, I expect this to be a tough test.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/40156259
The back 5 of the pack is a bit lightweight! Normally you'd pick Itoji or Lawes to partner a Kruis or Launch. That scrum will be interesting at the weekend. Halfpenny; Nowell, Payne, Henshaw, Daly; Biggar, Webb; McGrath, Owens (captain), Cole, Itoje, Lawes, Haskell, Tipuric, Stander
Replacements: Best, Marler, Sinckler, Henderson, O'Mahony, Laidlaw, Sexton, L Williams
Not a bad looking side that actually. Back row a bit lightweight maybe.
Blues will have several ABs, I expect this to be a tough test.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/40156259
hornetrider said:
Lions team to face the Blues.
Halfpenny; Nowell, Payne, Henshaw, Daly; Biggar, Webb; McGrath, Owens (captain), Cole, Itoje, Lawes, Haskell, Tipuric, Stander
Replacements: Best, Marler, Sinckler, Henderson, O'Mahony, Laidlaw, Sexton, L Williams
Not a bad looking side that actually. Back row a bit lightweight maybe.
Blues will have several ABs, I expect this to be a tough test.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/40156259
'Back row a bit lightweight'?Halfpenny; Nowell, Payne, Henshaw, Daly; Biggar, Webb; McGrath, Owens (captain), Cole, Itoje, Lawes, Haskell, Tipuric, Stander
Replacements: Best, Marler, Sinckler, Henderson, O'Mahony, Laidlaw, Sexton, L Williams
Not a bad looking side that actually. Back row a bit lightweight maybe.
Blues will have several ABs, I expect this to be a tough test.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/40156259
I am no Haskell cheerleader but have you seen the size of him? Tipuric is on fire generally whenever he dons that scrum cap - can turn a game on a sixpence with his technique over the ball and slowing down opposition. Several people I know are arguing for Stander to start in the Tests now that Billy is absent and the whole back row needs rethinking. TF may well start at 8 for the tests but I certainly quite like the back row picked.
Whether they click and work as a destructive unit is another matter though? Destruction is required on this tour to give our backs any hope. If we were going to outplay the ABs with flair, then the likes of Cipriani and Wade would maybe have been wild cards (with Sinckler - who is looking great!)
I really don't think we will outscore them on tries so we HAVE to destruct their quick ball and phase play. Tipuric will be good at that I think due to his sheer work rate. (Without sounding like a Wasps fan..
) I think Launchbury would also have brought a massive workload onto the pitch against the ABs. We simply don't have the flair to beat them IMO. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2017/04/20/...
Quite a good article and I particularly liked the quotes about Launchbury being a 'walking man of the match award and enjoyed a stand out 6N' !!
I might well have asked the same question four years ago, but does anyone else struggle to actually get engaged much by the Lions?
Maybe it's because we spend most of the time supporting our individual nations, but the Lions to me just feel like an artificial construct, and whilst I'm happy to watch top flight rugby whomever is playing, I'd much rather be watching England play - or Wales for that matter - than the Lions.
This thinking was triggered by my wife asking me if I was going to be watching the Lions games, and I just thought that I've not got Sky, and I really can't be arsed with going up to the rugby club at that time in the morning! If it was England touring and being shown on Sky, on the other hand, I'd be up there for every match without any shadow of a doubt.
Yes, in theory there's maybe a better chance of them winning (although in practice I reckon the current England or Ireland teams would beat the Lions if such a game were possible), but there's also a much better chance of a Premiership select XV beating Clermont, Toulon or whomever Quins draw in the Champions' Cup next season, but I'd still rather watch Quins play even if they lose than watch the artificial construct.
Maybe it's because we spend most of the time supporting our individual nations, but the Lions to me just feel like an artificial construct, and whilst I'm happy to watch top flight rugby whomever is playing, I'd much rather be watching England play - or Wales for that matter - than the Lions.
This thinking was triggered by my wife asking me if I was going to be watching the Lions games, and I just thought that I've not got Sky, and I really can't be arsed with going up to the rugby club at that time in the morning! If it was England touring and being shown on Sky, on the other hand, I'd be up there for every match without any shadow of a doubt.
Yes, in theory there's maybe a better chance of them winning (although in practice I reckon the current England or Ireland teams would beat the Lions if such a game were possible), but there's also a much better chance of a Premiership select XV beating Clermont, Toulon or whomever Quins draw in the Champions' Cup next season, but I'd still rather watch Quins play even if they lose than watch the artificial construct.
Slaav said:
'Back row a bit lightweight'?
I am no Haskell cheerleader but have you seen the size of him? Tipuric is on fire generally whenever he dons that scrum cap - can turn a game on a sixpence with his technique over the ball and slowing down opposition. Several people I know are arguing for Stander to start in the Tests now that Billy is absent and the whole back row needs rethinking. TF may well start at 8 for the tests but I certainly quite like the back row picked.
Whether they click and work as a destructive unit is another matter though? Destruction is required on this tour to give our backs any hope. If we were going to outplay the ABs with flair, then the likes of Cipriani and Wade would maybe have been wild cards (with Sinckler - who is looking great!)
I really don't think we will outscore them on tries so we HAVE to destruct their quick ball and phase play. Tipuric will be good at that I think due to his sheer work rate. (Without sounding like a Wasps fan..) I think Launchbury would also have brought a massive workload onto the pitch against the ABs. We simply don't have the flair to beat them IMO.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2017/04/20/...
Quite a good article and I particularly liked the quotes about Launchbury being a 'walking man of the match award and enjoyed a stand out 6N' !!
Yeah maybe I should clarify. It's only a vague thought anyway, but I don't mean lightweight in terms of ball playing ability, I meant destructiveness at the breakdown as I think you alluded to. Haskell is no impact ball carrier and Tipurics (I'm a fan) best work is in the loose out wide, don't think turnovers are his strength. Stander is a 6 playing 8 although he can do both and I'm not sure he's in the best form either.I am no Haskell cheerleader but have you seen the size of him? Tipuric is on fire generally whenever he dons that scrum cap - can turn a game on a sixpence with his technique over the ball and slowing down opposition. Several people I know are arguing for Stander to start in the Tests now that Billy is absent and the whole back row needs rethinking. TF may well start at 8 for the tests but I certainly quite like the back row picked.
Whether they click and work as a destructive unit is another matter though? Destruction is required on this tour to give our backs any hope. If we were going to outplay the ABs with flair, then the likes of Cipriani and Wade would maybe have been wild cards (with Sinckler - who is looking great!)
I really don't think we will outscore them on tries so we HAVE to destruct their quick ball and phase play. Tipuric will be good at that I think due to his sheer work rate. (Without sounding like a Wasps fan..
) I think Launchbury would also have brought a massive workload onto the pitch against the ABs. We simply don't have the flair to beat them IMO. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2017/04/20/...
Quite a good article and I particularly liked the quotes about Launchbury being a 'walking man of the match award and enjoyed a stand out 6N' !!
Kermit power said:
I might well have asked the same question four years ago, but does anyone else struggle to actually get engaged much by the Lions?
Maybe it's because we spend most of the time supporting our individual nations, but the Lions to me just feel like an artificial construct, and whilst I'm happy to watch top flight rugby whomever is playing, I'd much rather be watching England play - or Wales for that matter - than the Lions.
This thinking was triggered by my wife asking me if I was going to be watching the Lions games, and I just thought that I've not got Sky, and I really can't be arsed with going up to the rugby club at that time in the morning! If it was England touring and being shown on Sky, on the other hand, I'd be up there for every match without any shadow of a doubt.
Yes, in theory there's maybe a better chance of them winning (although in practice I reckon the current England or Ireland teams would beat the Lions if such a game were possible), but there's also a much better chance of a Premiership select XV beating Clermont, Toulon or whomever Quins draw in the Champions' Cup next season, but I'd still rather watch Quins play even if they lose than watch the artificial construct.
I'm not quite the same but similar. I'm struggling to get as excited about it as previously and I am definitely not as enthusiastic as I would be if it were England: the first game almost caught me by surprise. I think it's a combination of factors: the tour is so short that there really isn't enough time for any sort of narrative to develop. Given how little time there is Gatland must have an outline test team in his mind so we're really just going through the motions until the first test. Also, the players and particularly the coaching staff are all a bit sterile and corporate these days which doesn't elicit much passion from the rest of us. I'd kill for a bit of Telfer and McGeechan.Maybe it's because we spend most of the time supporting our individual nations, but the Lions to me just feel like an artificial construct, and whilst I'm happy to watch top flight rugby whomever is playing, I'd much rather be watching England play - or Wales for that matter - than the Lions.
This thinking was triggered by my wife asking me if I was going to be watching the Lions games, and I just thought that I've not got Sky, and I really can't be arsed with going up to the rugby club at that time in the morning! If it was England touring and being shown on Sky, on the other hand, I'd be up there for every match without any shadow of a doubt.
Yes, in theory there's maybe a better chance of them winning (although in practice I reckon the current England or Ireland teams would beat the Lions if such a game were possible), but there's also a much better chance of a Premiership select XV beating Clermont, Toulon or whomever Quins draw in the Champions' Cup next season, but I'd still rather watch Quins play even if they lose than watch the artificial construct.
That said, when the first test does arrive I'll most likely be bouncing off the walls. (But if we're s
t I'll be the epitome of the fair weather supporter...)Kermit power said:
I might well have asked the same question four years ago, but does anyone else struggle to actually get engaged much by the Lions?
Maybe it's because we spend most of the time supporting our individual nations, but the Lions to me just feel like an artificial construct, and whilst I'm happy to watch top flight rugby whomever is playing, I'd much rather be watching England play - or Wales for that matter - than the Lions.
I feel much the same. I will watch a good game of rugby, almost regardless of who is playing. The Lions leave me lukewarm at best.Maybe it's because we spend most of the time supporting our individual nations, but the Lions to me just feel like an artificial construct, and whilst I'm happy to watch top flight rugby whomever is playing, I'd much rather be watching England play - or Wales for that matter - than the Lions.
I will probably go to my rugby club if they are dong the bacon rolls etc, but that is for the craic as much as anything. As for the people I know who are going out for the Tests - well, that leaves me stone cold.
I'm the complete opposite to you guys. The Lions for me is like the Ryder Cup. Absolutely massive event and personally I think a Lions tour is easily as big as the world cup.
It's the pinnacle of a player's playing career to be picked to be a) a Lion, b) a test Lion and then to actually win a tour? You etch your name into folklore.
It's the pinnacle of a player's playing career to be picked to be a) a Lion, b) a test Lion and then to actually win a tour? You etch your name into folklore.
hornetrider said:
++
Faletau
Moriarty
Sinckler
T'Eo
+
Tipuric
Farrell
--
Hogg
Sexton
The rest - average.
But a W is a W.
Agreed that getting through the first match with a "W" is the only thing that matters, particularly when you think back to games like the Argies in 2005. it's worth remembering that we were looking at a bunch of guys playing together competitively for the first time, who had done a 12,000 mile flight less than 72hrs prior.Faletau
Moriarty
Sinckler
T'Eo
+
Tipuric
Farrell
--
Hogg
Sexton
The rest - average.
But a W is a W.
Having said that, the starting halfback partnership is a large reason why we failed to get established in that game. Laidlaw was beyond awful, and showed why he's (at best) 6th choice #9 for the Lions and a pick to stop the Scots' supporters moaning.
He was slow, silent and played the entirety of his game with his head down, as shown here: https://twitter.com/RugbyInsideLine/status/8709225...
The team for the Blues holds more promise, although Biggar at 10 doesn't bode hugely well unless he gets lots of quick ball. Some established pairings, and a hard-grafting back row should see us put in a much more cohesive performance.
Kermit power said:
I might well have asked the same question four years ago, but does anyone else struggle to actually get engaged much by the Lions?
Maybe it's because we spend most of the time supporting our individual nations, but the Lions to me just feel like an artificial construct, and whilst I'm happy to watch top flight rugby whomever is playing, I'd much rather be watching England play - or Wales for that matter - than the Lions.
This thinking was triggered by my wife asking me if I was going to be watching the Lions games, and I just thought that I've not got Sky, and I really can't be arsed with going up to the rugby club at that time in the morning! If it was England touring and being shown on Sky, on the other hand, I'd be up there for every match without any shadow of a doubt.
Yes, in theory there's maybe a better chance of them winning (although in practice I reckon the current England or Ireland teams would beat the Lions if such a game were possible), but there's also a much better chance of a Premiership select XV beating Clermont, Toulon or whomever Quins draw in the Champions' Cup next season, but I'd still rather watch Quins play even if they lose than watch the artificial construct.
I don't care about our chance of winning - I don't watch rugby because I think my team are going to win, I watch because I love the game.Maybe it's because we spend most of the time supporting our individual nations, but the Lions to me just feel like an artificial construct, and whilst I'm happy to watch top flight rugby whomever is playing, I'd much rather be watching England play - or Wales for that matter - than the Lions.
This thinking was triggered by my wife asking me if I was going to be watching the Lions games, and I just thought that I've not got Sky, and I really can't be arsed with going up to the rugby club at that time in the morning! If it was England touring and being shown on Sky, on the other hand, I'd be up there for every match without any shadow of a doubt.
Yes, in theory there's maybe a better chance of them winning (although in practice I reckon the current England or Ireland teams would beat the Lions if such a game were possible), but there's also a much better chance of a Premiership select XV beating Clermont, Toulon or whomever Quins draw in the Champions' Cup next season, but I'd still rather watch Quins play even if they lose than watch the artificial construct.
The Lions is the most exciting thing in rugby for me. It's a wonderful anachronism in a rapidly changing game, and you're witnessing a bunch of blokes combining talent and the traditional spirit of rugby.
Slaav said:
'Back row a bit lightweight'?
I am no Haskell cheerleader but have you seen the size of him? Tipuric is on fire generally whenever he dons that scrum cap - can turn a game on a sixpence with his technique over the ball and slowing down opposition. Several people I know are arguing for Stander to start in the Tests now that Billy is absent and the whole back row needs rethinking. TF may well start at 8 for the tests but I certainly quite like the back row picked.
Whether they click and work as a destructive unit is another matter though? Destruction is required on this tour to give our backs any hope. If we were going to outplay the ABs with flair, then the likes of Cipriani and Wade would maybe have been wild cards (with Sinckler - who is looking great!)
I really don't think we will outscore them on tries so we HAVE to destruct their quick ball and phase play. Tipuric will be good at that I think due to his sheer work rate. (Without sounding like a Wasps fan..) I think Launchbury would also have brought a massive workload onto the pitch against the ABs. We simply don't have the flair to beat them IMO.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2017/04/20/...
Quite a good article and I particularly liked the quotes about Launchbury being a 'walking man of the match award and enjoyed a stand out 6N' !!
Cipriani has shown time after time that he fails to perform on the biggest stage - it's the reason that he's not even been the best #10 at his club this season. Hask of 2 years ago would have been an excellent option, but he's been poor in a season that has seen his gametime reduced due to injury. His slot should have gone to Hamish Watson or Nathan Hughes, both of whom offer us better options and players in good form.I am no Haskell cheerleader but have you seen the size of him? Tipuric is on fire generally whenever he dons that scrum cap - can turn a game on a sixpence with his technique over the ball and slowing down opposition. Several people I know are arguing for Stander to start in the Tests now that Billy is absent and the whole back row needs rethinking. TF may well start at 8 for the tests but I certainly quite like the back row picked.
Whether they click and work as a destructive unit is another matter though? Destruction is required on this tour to give our backs any hope. If we were going to outplay the ABs with flair, then the likes of Cipriani and Wade would maybe have been wild cards (with Sinckler - who is looking great!)
I really don't think we will outscore them on tries so we HAVE to destruct their quick ball and phase play. Tipuric will be good at that I think due to his sheer work rate. (Without sounding like a Wasps fan..
) I think Launchbury would also have brought a massive workload onto the pitch against the ABs. We simply don't have the flair to beat them IMO. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2017/04/20/...
Quite a good article and I particularly liked the quotes about Launchbury being a 'walking man of the match award and enjoyed a stand out 6N' !!
I'm a big fan of Launchbury's, and his omission on tour was probably the most surprising. However, he reminds me a lot of a POC-style player, who makes lots of short carries into traffic (look at his stats, particularly his average carry distance). He's got a great engine, but he's not a dynamic player like a Henderson or Itoje (or, dare I say it based on recent England form, Lawes). Add into this that he's not an experienced Lion (like AWJ) and not a lineout caller (like Kruis), and it's really hard to make a case for him.
Wade is unlucky to be overlooked again (although he technically went last time) with such a try-scoring record. However, you can't overlook his defensive frailties, particularly positioning and high balls - NZ would have his card marked immediately. On Saturday's showing he's a damn sight better going forward than Seymour, but he wouldn't be anywhere near my test 23.
Too many players in the squad who look to take contact, _then_ think about their offload (if any). Leads to slow ball which is easy to defend against.
Laidlaw and Webb were both guilty of passing the ball _at_ the one-out player instead of in front of the player running at pace. This really is basic, basic stuff that kids learn.
Laidlaw and Webb were both guilty of passing the ball _at_ the one-out player instead of in front of the player running at pace. This really is basic, basic stuff that kids learn.
C70R said:
Agreed that getting through the first match with a "W" is the only thing that matters, particularly when you think back to games like the Argies in 2005. it's worth remembering that we were looking at a bunch of guys playing together competitively for the first time, who had done a 12,000 mile flight less than 72hrs prior.
Having said that, the starting halfback partnership is a large reason why we failed to get established in that game. Laidlaw was beyond awful, and showed why he's (at best) 6th choice #9 for the Lions and a pick to stop the Scots' supporters moaning.
He was slow, silent and played the entirety of his game with his head down, as shown here: https://twitter.com/RugbyInsideLine/status/8709225...
The team for the Blues holds more promise, although Biggar at 10 doesn't bode hugely well unless he gets lots of quick ball. Some established pairings, and a hard-grafting back row should see us put in a much more cohesive performance.
So painful watching that clip again - Care would have been in under the posts, so probably would YoungsHaving said that, the starting halfback partnership is a large reason why we failed to get established in that game. Laidlaw was beyond awful, and showed why he's (at best) 6th choice #9 for the Lions and a pick to stop the Scots' supporters moaning.
He was slow, silent and played the entirety of his game with his head down, as shown here: https://twitter.com/RugbyInsideLine/status/8709225...
The team for the Blues holds more promise, although Biggar at 10 doesn't bode hugely well unless he gets lots of quick ball. Some established pairings, and a hard-grafting back row should see us put in a much more cohesive performance.
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff