Lions 2017

First topic message reminder :

Looking at the recent internationals and to beat allblack you need pace and vision so this is my team so far! 1.m.vunipola 2.hartley 3.furlong 4.itoje 5.kruis 6.faletau 7.stander 8. B.vunipola 9. Youngs 10.ford 11.watson 12.farrell 13.joseph 14.l.williams 15. Hogg 16.best 17.mcgrath 18.lee 19 .henderson 20.o'brien 21.murray 22.henshaw 23.north

beshocked wrote:no 7 & 1/2 of course you always write off George's performances. George has done his job well. Not sure what much more he can do. He comes on and generally makes a difference in the scrum which of course you dismiss because it's in the last 20. With your logic, Itoje would have never got a start. We'd have likely lost to Wales in the 6 nations with an unfit Launchbury in his place.

You don't think George would help his team mate like he does virtually all the time for Saracens?

A couple of George's highlights

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RA3Qzo2l4UU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqThtUH1yrY

When have I written him off? I was asking a question of if you think he was above Hartley in the AIs in particular; I don't think he was. But yes you don have to consider George is coming off the bench against generally tiring or inferior players don't you? A consideration at least.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:But we know he can play there, we know he's better there why would you limit yourself and discount him from his best position? Itoje doesn't play 6 for England but I think he'd do an outstanding job there for the Lions. We also know gatland doesn't mind playing people outside of their country's positions given Tuilagi at 12, Hogg at 10 (ok that last one was crazy!).

I know you are saying that in jest, but I have seen it mentioned as serious comments by others on here. Hogg is simply not a 10. The thought of him marshaling Beauden Barrett in a test match at FH is terrifying.

No completely agree, more a point of Gatland not only playing a player in their 'normal' position.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:But we know he can play there, we know he's better there why would you limit yourself and discount him from his best position? Itoje doesn't play 6 for England but I think he'd do an outstanding job there for the Lions. We also know gatland doesn't mind playing people outside of their country's positions given Tuilagi at 12, Hogg at 10 (ok that last one was crazy!).

If he is so good there why isnt he being picked for England at 10? Ford isnt even a front runner to be picked as Lions 10 and yet he is keeping Farrell out of the 10 position. Does that not seem odd to you?

Personally I think Farrell is a better centre. He doesn't control games particularly well form 10.

Because England, in Jones' opinion don't have a suitable 12, Farrell was his preferred 10.

I don't believe that's entirely true.

More a case of wanting Fords creativity at 10, and having to fit someone who could take the kicks for him somewhere in the 15.

He obviously rates Farrell very highly though, he made no bones in the early days about wanting someone like Tuilagi at 12 who would run at defenders rather than a second 10 like Farrell.


Pick Ford for the Lions and you have the same issue in having to force a reliable kicker in elsewhere, which could be Farrell at 12. Put Farrell at 10 and yes you risk blunting the attacking game that Gatland has said he wants.

The initial question is a bit odd when people are seriously talking about Cirpiani crashing the party, who hasn't been picked by any international manager for years.

As is stands I still see Farrell as a really strong bench option, and Sexton as the go to starter. Ford could miss out altogether. But lets see how the 6 nations goes, everyone will have changed their minds by then ( and half the guys be injured )

I'm not sure that's right. It's a bit of toss up for me as I think they're both really good 10s who will probably go onto be great but I think he sees Farrell as his 10 when he has a reliable 12.

If the starting 10 can kick, Farrell will not play 12. Same for England i imagine once we have a decent option.

Yes I agree completely with that. Don't really rate Farrell as a good 12 at all.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yes I agree completely with that. Don't really rate Farrell as a good 12 at all.

well then he shouldnt be in the squad because he isnt a great 10 either and doesnt play there at test level.

He's one of the best 10s in Europe and was our best 10 on the last tour. He's only got better since then. (please note that I still think Sexton is better, indeed the best).

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yes I agree completely with that. Don't really rate Farrell as a good 12 at all.

well then he shouldnt be in the squad because he isnt a great 10 either and doesnt play there at test level.

Yea he's awful.......

Farrell is in the top 3 FH's in the NH and will tour if fit.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yes I agree completely with that. Don't really rate Farrell as a good 12 at all.

well then he shouldnt be in the squad because he isnt a great 10 either and doesnt play there at test level.

Yea he's awful.......

Farrell is in the top 3 FH's in the NH and will tour if fit.

How do you know if he doesnt play FH?

He's plays 10 for the best side in Europe (arguably) and has played at 10 for England in the recent past.

Have we got any nailed on starters so far then?

I'd go with Billy V, JJ and Hogg.

Don't think there's much arguable about Sarries currently being the best side in Europe TBH, it's pretty clear they are, given their form over the last year and a half.

Farrell is a very good FH, and a decent IC. I actually think he's settled into the England 12 role nicely. If everyone were fit, I'd take both him and Ford, with Sexton as well.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Have we got any nailed on starters so far then?

I'd go with Billy V, JJ and Hogg.

Sorry, Billy V injured badly and will IMO not have enough time to prove fitness. A devestating loss for the Lions TBH otherwise I agree.

Simon Taylor another number 8 never recovered from his ACL tear.

Billy Vunipola's injury is a dreadful bit of luck because had he stayed fit and healthy he would be my starting 8 as well. He is a wrecking machine of a man.

No 7&1/2 wrote:He's plays 10 for the best side in Europe (arguably) and has played at 10 for England in the recent past.

England are currently the best side in Europe and he doesnt play 10 for them. The Lions isnt a club rugby tournament. It demands a higher standard. Even higher than the 6 nations.

no 7 & 1/2 well obviously I do.



Farrell is good but unless you play him to look after Ford I am not sure I'd have him in at 12 and don't think he'd be ahead of Sexton.

Sexton doesn't rely on others as much as either Ford or Farrell.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Have we got any nailed on starters so far then?

I'd go with Billy V, JJ and Hogg.

Sorry, Billy V injured badly and will IMO not have enough time to prove fitness. A devestating loss for the Lions TBH otherwise I agree.

Vuinpola is easily the best 8 option imo, he'll tour even if he misses the 6N. I think he'll get plenty of game time for Sarries prior to the tour.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Have we got any nailed on starters so far then?

I'd go with Billy V, JJ and Hogg.

Sorry, Billy V injured badly and will IMO not have enough time to prove fitness. A devestating loss for the Lions TBH otherwise I agree.

Simon Taylor and Ross Rennie are 2 very notable scottish backrowers who never recovered from the ACL tear.

Billy Vunipola's injury is a dreadful bit of luck because had he stayed fit and healthy he would be my starting 8 as well. He is a wrecking machine of a man.

Vunipola's meant to return sometime around end of Feb or beginning of March isn't he? I would think that would be long enough to prove his fitness IF true: he'll still have the run-in to the AP and Euro comp, and you'd expect Sarries to be involved at the deep end of both. OK probably no internationals, so not ideal, but if he shows enough in the high level games he plays in I'd still take him.

Also, IIRC it's not the ACL, it's cartillage damage (rather than ligaments) which I think is less bad...

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:He's plays 10 for the best side in Europe (arguably) and has played at 10 for England in the recent past.

England are currently the best side in Europe and he doesnt play 10 for them. The Lions isnt a club rugby tournament. It demands a higher standard. Even higher than the 6 nations.

Thought I'd explained this but Jones considers Ford at 10 and Farrell at 12 better than Farrell at 10 and anyone else at 12. That doesn't mean he prefers Ford or thinks he's better necessarily.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Have we got any nailed on starters so far then?

I'd go with Billy V, JJ and Hogg.

Sorry, Billy V injured badly and will IMO not have enough time to prove fitness. A devestating loss for the Lions TBH otherwise I agree.

Vuinpola is easily the best 8 option imo, he'll tour even if he misses the 6N. I think he'll get plenty of game time for Sarries prior to the tour.

You think? I'm not disputing it directly as such, more indirectly. I agree he is the best option at 8, but with such a brutal schedule in NZ I'm not sure Gatland would risk bringing someone who may not be 100%. What is his estimated recovery time? I hope he can regain fitness and then form, but I think we have some good options at no.8 with Faletau, Heaslip and the impressive Moriarty.

Moriarty is no 8 imo.

Faletau, although quality, is a level below. Heaslip I dont rate in the slightest although he's had a few good games recently.

Billy gives us something that very few NH players can, front foot ball. Stander is another (who should also tour) but not at that level.

Ruggerradge Gatland parachuted in Lydiate from nowhere. Okay might be harder for Billy because he's not Welsh but still....

Sgt Pooly you think Faletau is a level below Moriarty?

beshocked wrote:Ruggerradge Gatland parachuted in Lydiate from nowhere. Okay might be harder for Billy because he's not Welsh but still....

Sgt Pooly you think Faletau is a level below Moriarty?

Lydiate should have been nowhere near that test squad. Kelly Brown and Chris Robshaw were both playing better rugby.

I disagree re Lydiate. He was a great player at the time and was one of our top performers in the tests.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Have we got any nailed on starters so far then?

I'd go with Billy V, JJ and Hogg.

Sorry, Billy V injured badly and will IMO not have enough time to prove fitness. A devestating loss for the Lions TBH otherwise I agree.

Vuinpola is easily the best 8 option imo, he'll tour even if he misses the 6N. I think he'll get plenty of game time for Sarries prior to the tour.

You think? I'm not disputing it directly as such, more indirectly. I agree he is the best option at 8, but with such a brutal schedule in NZ I'm not sure Gatland would risk bringing someone who may not be 100%. What is his estimated recovery time? I hope he can regain fitness and then form, but I think we have some good options at no.8 with Faletau, Heaslip and the impressive Moriarty.

He has before, although it was not the best outcome......

Lydiate has only ever been a great player in Jiffy's wet dreams

Pooly meant that Faletau is a level below Billy, not below Moriarty

ruggerradge very true. Both Brown and Robshaw were very unlucky. Croft was very lucky to tour too.

gunsgerms Lydiate was overrated.

I just hope that Gatland doesn't pick a lot of Welsh players, in 2013 I think it was fair to pick quite a few Welsh players (not Lydiate though) but in 2017, Wales have gone backwards.

Likes of Roberts,Jenkins,North just not good enough anymore IMO.

Funnily enough I do think AWJ is one of Wales' best players but the problem lock is a real position of strength.

IMO Faletau is much better than Moriarty.

Doesn't help that the Irish and English are playing well. The Scots also has a couple of strong contenders - J.Gray and Hogg which might push out the Welsh players there.

Gatland and co also have to think about combos.

E.g. I think the Irish halfbacks would be best, English 2nd row etc. I just don't see an area the Welsh excel in.

A lot of the Welsh players aren't bad, it's just there are superior options available in other nations IMO.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'm not sure that's right. It's a bit of toss up for me as I think they're both really good 10s who will probably go onto be great but I think he sees Farrell as his 10 when he has a reliable 12.

I don't think that's necessarily true. I think we have seen Ford/Farrell as the dominant combination because there hasn't been a better fit option at 12, but I also think that Eddie would be quite prepared to use it even with, say, a fit Tuilagi as an option. As Woodward learned (quite late in the day) in 2003, sometimes you want a crash ball centre and sometimes you want a 2nd 5/8ths.

Unless, say, Mallinder emerges as a true combination of the two (possible, but not yet), there will be space for players who fit both styles. Farrell can play 1st or 2nd 5/8ths.

The key thing for me is that if you play him at 10, you need a more creative player at 9 or 12. If you play him at 12, you need one at 10. It's all about the combinations. For the Lions, he will almost certainly travel if fit, because if Sexton is injured or off form he offers probably the next best all round skillset.

In terms of back-row I would like to see: -

Stander, SOB and Vunipola but this would require a fairly athletic front-five with sufficient line-out capability (otherwise perhaps Itoje in the back-row).  But I think those three would causes problems for the AB's.

Faletau and Moriarty are both good and Moriarty is improving fast. Robshaw is very dependable and does some of the unseen stuff.

beshocked wrote:

gunsgerms Lydiate was overrated.

I disagree, guys like Mike Philips were over rated. Lydiate was for me definitely one of the top performing Lions. He was one of only a hand full of players to play all three tests and for good reason.

In the first test he replaced Tom Croft. He was much more over rated than Lydiate IMO.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

beshocked wrote:

gunsgerms Lydiate was overrated.

I disagree, guys like Mike Philips were over rated. Lydiate was for me definitely one of the top performing Lions. He was one of only a hand full of players to play all three tests and for good reason.

In the first test he replaced Tom Croft. He was much more over rated than Lydiate IMO.

I remember him having one good game........

It's no coincidence that the 7s played well when Lydiate was at 6. Well in fact the whole backrow played well when he was at 6. He doesn't have that effect now though, I do admit.

Nooooo....Faletau is a much better 8 than Moriarty. Moriarty is improving but misses way too many tackles to be considered a top backrow.

Vuinipola, Stander and Faletau are the only sort of nailed on backrowers currently imo.

Riskysports wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

beshocked wrote:

gunsgerms Lydiate was overrated.

I disagree, guys like Mike Philips were over rated. Lydiate was for me definitely one of the top performing Lions. He was one of only a hand full of players to play all three tests and for good reason.

In the first test he replaced Tom Croft. He was much more over rated than Lydiate IMO.

I remember him having one good game........

They needed a token English guy in 09.

Gunsgerms I wouldn't call Croft overrated because I am not sure anyone rated his performances highly.

cb the issue with that then you would be sacrificing one of J.Gray,Launchbury,Kruis or Itoje.

I just don't think having Stander,SOB and Vunipola is a well balanced backrow but maybe I am wrong.

Poorfour wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'm not sure that's right. It's a bit of toss up for me as I think they're both really good 10s who will probably go onto be great but I think he sees Farrell as his 10 when he has a reliable 12.

I don't think that's necessarily true. I think we have seen Ford/Farrell as the dominant combination because there hasn't been a better fit option at 12, but I also think that Eddie would be quite prepared to use it even with, say, a fit Tuilagi as an option. As Woodward learned (quite late in the day) in 2003, sometimes you want a crash ball centre and sometimes you want a 2nd 5/8ths.

Unless, say, Mallinder emerges as a true combination of the two (possible, but not yet), there will be space for players who fit both styles. Farrell can play 1st or 2nd 5/8ths.

The key thing for me is that if you play him at 10, you need a more creative player at 9 or 12. If you play him at 12, you need one at 10. It's all about the combinations. For the Lions, he will almost certainly travel if fit, because if Sexton is injured or off form he offers probably the next best all round skillset.

It's not as if Saracens have an highly creative players around him (Wigglesworth, Barritt) but they still score plenty of tries.

I would agree with No 7&1/2, England don't have a stand-out player at inside centre right now but two top class FHs.

reallybored Goode is a very creative player, certainly at club level, he most definitely helps Farrell. Sure he's not a 9 or 12 but Farrell needs him.

A backline needs balance - at club level - Farrell has Wigglesworth as box kicker expert, Barritt to run the defence, Goode - as an extra playmaker. Responsibilities are shared.


Obviously the Lions need to find the right balance of game management, physicality and creativity in the backline.

With Howley that's not going to be easy....

I am trying to be measured in my response to this, but Gatland's recent quote to the BBC is idiotic (the context being that Scotland backs coach Jason O'Halloran has also turned down the privilege of being No. 2 to the Howler):

The Fatman wrote:"The ideal scenario from my point of view would be having someone from Scotland to give some representation, to push the Scottish cause, to push some of their players," he told BBC Wales.

"That's important. Someone from within the Scottish system will know their players a lot better than we do, they'll know the characters and the individuals and potentially push them on a 50/50 decision.

"My ideal scenario would be to have someone from Scotland. If that happens, that would be great."

This is the first time that the Lions management team has admitted that there will be partisan decision making and that national coaches will be inclined to lobby for and push their 'own' players forward.

Everyone knows that this is how it works in practice, but to actually say that out loud or strongly suggest it is just simply misspeaking.

He is supposed to be choosing the best players for the job - that's it. Just really unprofessional.

George Carlin wrote:I am trying to be measured in my response to this, but Gatland's recent quote to the BBC is idiotic (the context being that Scotland backs coach Jason O'Halloran has also turned down the privilege of being No. 2 to the Howler):

The Fatman wrote:"The ideal scenario from my point of view would be having someone from Scotland to give some representation, to push the Scottish cause, to push some of their players," he told BBC Wales.

"That's important. Someone from within the Scottish system will know their players a lot better than we do, they'll know the characters and the individuals and potentially push them on a 50/50 decision.

"My ideal scenario would be to have someone from Scotland. If that happens, that would be great."

This is the first time that the Lions management team has admitted that there will be partisan decision making and that national coaches will be inclined to lobby for and push their 'own' players forward.

Everyone knows that this is how it works in practice, but to actually say that out loud or strongly suggest it is just simply misspeaking.

He is supposed to be choosing the best players for the job - that's it. Just really unprofessional.

It is not a surpirse though

last time he picked players out of form, injured, slow (Philips) or just terrible (Phillips), as they were Welsh

There are a lot of very good Welsh players which would be picked due to form. But his comments will likely taint even them too - which is a shame

Just another moment

In case anyone doesn't understand why this makes people angry - just imagine how a player would feel if there are any 50:50 calls in selection where a Welsh player is preferred in squad or match selection: that player now has the official line as to why. Way to foster collegiality and team spirit.

2005 all over again.

George Carlin wrote:In case anyone doesn't understand why this makes people angry - just imagine how a player would feel if there are any 50:50 calls in selection where a Welsh player is preferred in squad or match selection: that player now has the official line as to why. Way to foster collegiality and team spirit.

2005 all over again.

It is not the 50/50 calls that would annoy

It will be the 70/30 calls that will f people off, and we know it will happen

George Carlin I don't think it's wrong for Gatland to say it. It's perfectly natural for people to push for their own players. There's always a bit of bias, it's not easy to be completely impartial.

Scots champion J.Gray, Welsh champion AWJ, English fans champion English locks, etc.

Irish have been quiet on the lock front but at hooker, the call for Best is strong.

Would not surprise me if there's a bit of Saracens bias for obvious reasons. Is it right or fair? Perhaps not but if it works.....

Imagine the furore if Gatland's controversial dropping of BOD didn't work. It was bad enough as it was.

How does one decide whose best? Also being best for Gatland ball isn't the same as being best suited to beat ABs.

I am no fan of Gatland but he did win the 2013 tour. Picking predominantly Welsh players worked in the circumstances.

One Kiwi,two English and one Welsh - not exactly a fair representation in coaching.... I would say that England have a good chance of being favoured.

2 Welsh, 1 English and 1 irislh. All professionals. Head of which has had a year off to prepare tactics, scout players and ask their coaches what they're like as people etc. Stupid comments for gatland and a reason I wanted a head coach not with a national team.

beshocked wrote:...It's perfectly natural for people to push for their own players. There's always a bit of bias, it's not easy to be completely impartial...

These are professional coaches, not fans. They ought to be able to judge the calibre of a player without regard to nationality. Club and regional coaches manage to do it, so it's not too much to ask for a similar judgement at a more elite level.

No 7&1/2 wrote:2 Welsh, 1 English and 1 irislh. All professionals. Head of which has had a year off to prepare tactics, scout players and ask their coaches what they're like as people etc. Stupid comments for gatland and a reason I wanted a head coach not with a national team.

+1 from me!

The Lions coach needs to be impartial and should not be a current or recent "Home Nation" coach!

Forget Gatland, imagine the outcry if the Coach for the Lions was Vern Cotter and he left Itoje or AWJ at home and took both Gray brothers - a journalist then asks why he chose them over the English and Welsh favorites and Cotter's reply was "They're all grand players, but as I've worked with both the Gray boys before, I know what they bring to the table so I've stuck with them"

There'd be calls for his head!

No 7&1/2 wrote:2 Welsh, 1 English and 1 irislh.

2 Welsh and 2 English.

beshocked wrote:

Would not surprise me if there's a bit of Saracens bias for obvious reasons.

You must be kidding me?!!!

Surely not?!?!

Rugby Fan wrote:

beshocked wrote:...It's perfectly natural for people to push for their own players. There's always a bit of bias, it's not easy to be completely impartial...

These are professional coaches, not fans. They ought to be able to judge the calibre of a player without regard to nationality. Club and regional coaches manage to do it, so it's not too much to ask for a similar judgement at a more elite level.

Exactly. I'm most perplexed by the idea that Gatland won't over the next six months know the players from other countries. There's a really novel way for him to remedy this... crazy, I know... but he could always go and watch their matches. Utterly bonkers, right? He could even sit in on, or record training sessions. He could even meet the players himself. I mean, what the hell else is going to be doing for the next six months? What has he been doing since the summer?

Jesus Christ.

Before you all cart me off to the funny farm for this blue-sky thinking, Gatland could watch a match on both Saturday and Sunday throughout the Six Nations:
Sco v Ire
Ita v Wal

Wal v Eng
Fra v Sco

Sco v Wal
Eng v Ita

Wal v Ire
Eng v Sco

Eng v Ire

This would mean he'd have watched England, Scotland and Wales four times, and Ireland three times. Go on, Gatland, be crazy. Do your feicking job.

BamBam wrote:

beshocked wrote:

Would not surprise me if there's a bit of Saracens bias for obvious reasons.

You must be kidding me?!!!

Surely not?!?!

I think beshocked was referring to potential Sarries bias in the Lions, based on the fact that Farrell and Borthwick both have strong Sarries connections. I'm almost certain that beshocked is an absolute paragon of neutrality on any rugby related topic.

Farrell is an Ireland coach rodders.