NEW ZEALAND v BRITISH & IRISH LIONS, 24 June

LondonTiger wrote:I doubt many people, other than the coaches, would have picked this team in it's entirety. That would have been the case no matter what and whom they selected. For everyone whinging about AWJ, Farrell, Te'o, JD2, Daly, Williams being in the side, there would be people whinging if they were not. I am worried that too much store has been set for a good performance against a weak Chiefs team, and last minute changes made - but we do not know the thought processes the coached have followed.

I suppose after the game, which we will probably lose fairly comfortably, there will be recriminations along national bias - but just for now we are not English, Welsh or Irish -

WE ARE LIONS*.

Sorry Scots, we do feel your pain - honest.

LondonTiger wrote:I doubt many people, other than the coaches, would have picked this team in it's entirety. That would have been the case no matter what and whom they selected. For everyone whinging about AWJ, Farrell, Te'o, JD2, Daly, Williams being in the side, there would be people whinging if they were not. I am worried that too much store has been set for a good performance against a weak Chiefs team, and last minute changes made - but we do not know the thought processes the coached have followed.

I suppose after the game, which we will probably lose fairly comfortably, there will be recriminations along national bias - but just for now we are not English, Welsh or Irish -

WE ARE LIONS*.

Sorry Scots, we do feel your pain - honest.

BigGee wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:I doubt many people, other than the coaches, would have picked this team in it's entirety. That would have been the case no matter what and whom they selected. For everyone whinging about AWJ, Farrell, Te'o, JD2, Daly, Williams being in the side, there would be people whinging if they were not. I am worried that too much store has been set for a good performance against a weak Chiefs team, and last minute changes made - but we do not know the thought processes the coached have followed.

I suppose after the game, which we will probably lose fairly comfortably, there will be recriminations along national bias - but just for now we are not English, Welsh or Irish -

WE ARE LIONS*.

Sorry Scots, we do feel your pain - honest.

It just means that we are not emotionally involved in it. That is sad for the concept of the Lions but we have kind of got use to that.

For the record, I hope the Lions do win get stuffed royally. Then maybe we'll see the back of Gatland. The funniest moment of the week was when I heard the Lions' management were looking for bugs in their hotel: they thought the AB's were trying to listen in on their tactical discussions. Tactics!!! that 10 year old boy who picked the Cheifs team knows what Gatland's tactics will be. His granny knows too. If I am honest though, I will be more interested in the result of the Scotland v Fiji game than this one.

jimbopip wrote:

BigGee wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:I doubt many people, other than the coaches, would have picked this team in it's entirety. That would have been the case no matter what and whom they selected. For everyone whinging about AWJ, Farrell, Te'o, JD2, Daly, Williams being in the side, there would be people whinging if they were not. I am worried that too much store has been set for a good performance against a weak Chiefs team, and last minute changes made - but we do not know the thought processes the coached have followed.

I suppose after the game, which we will probably lose fairly comfortably, there will be recriminations along national bias - but just for now we are not English, Welsh or Irish -

WE ARE LIONS*.

Sorry Scots, we do feel your pain - honest.

It just means that we are not emotionally involved in it. That is sad for the concept of the Lions but we have kind of got use to that.

For the record, I hope the Lions do win get stuffed royally. Then maybe we'll see the back of Gatland. The funniest moment of the week was when I heard the Lions' management were looking for bugs in their hotel: they thought the AB's were trying to listen in on their tactical discussions. Tactics!!! that 10 year old boy who picked the Cheifs team knows what Gatland's tactics will be. His granny knows too. If I am honest though, I will be more interested in the result of the Scotland v Fiji game than this one.

As ever, I find myself agreeing with Gee 99.9%

cascough wrote:Really disappointing to see that even at this stage in the tour the Lions is still parochial for some people.

I would genuinely be interested to know why/how people think Seymour or Laidlaw have played better than their competition.

As a wider point, someone said "we have 0 representation". Assuming you're British or Irish, there are 23 players representing you in that squad.

It looks like an exciting squad to me, and form looks to have been rewarded. There's a couple of players it could be argued have struggled for form (AWJ, for example), but they are vastly experienced. Picking this team (or any team) is surely always about balancing form and experience. This looks to be a better blend of that than most expected, with a lot of people assuming halfpenny, North etc were shoe ins. Can't we all get excited about that?

cascough wrote:Really disappointing to see that even at this stage in the tour the Lions is still parochial for some people.

I would genuinely be interested to know why/how people think Seymour or Laidlaw have played better than their competition.

As a wider point, someone said "we have 0 representation". Assuming you're British or Irish, there are 23 players representing you in that squad.

It looks like an exciting squad to me, and form looks to have been rewarded. There's a couple of players it could be argued have struggled for form (AWJ, for example), but they are vastly experienced. Picking this team (or any team) is surely always about balancing form and experience. This looks to be a better blend of that than most expected, with a lot of people assuming halfpenny, North etc were shoe ins. Can't we all get excited about that?

emack2 wrote:It seems to me a case of all smoke and mirrors,assumptions of the way
each side will play.The weather may have some influence,Refs policeing
of the laws.
Line speed is just another name for offside,hopefully the Ref will not
favour either side.
Given that the areas of maul/scrum/lineout/breakdown where either side
can be pinged for multiple offences it is a lottery.
AS an NZ fan expect a 3=0 series win but expect it to be close

carpet baboon wrote:What do our NZ posters think about the crotty SBW partnership? Thought LB would get the nod.

BamBam wrote:Its going to be great having Itoje as an impact player off the bench

Someone should have pointed out it'd be even better to have impact starting the game (Itoje) and coming off it (Lawes/Henderson) rather than rolling out an old mare who should have been put out to pasture (but PASHUN and EKSHPERIENSH)

I reckon Launchbury would be more effective at lock than Jones if he landed in NZ 1 hour before kickoff

Griff wrote:

BamBam wrote:Its going to be great having Itoje as an impact player off the bench

Someone should have pointed out it'd be even better to have impact starting the game (Itoje) and coming off it (Lawes/Henderson) rather than rolling out an old mare who should have been put out to pasture (but PASHUN and EKSHPERIENSH)

I reckon Launchbury would be more effective at lock than Jones if he landed in NZ 1 hour before kickoff

Is Sean Connery playing?!

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:What do our NZ posters think about the crotty SBW partnership? Thought LB would get the nod.

4 weeks ago I'd have picked Crotty/ALB as my pairing, but SBW's found form at the right time. Crotty's better on defence than ALB which makes him the better starter I guess - he's also someone who makes those around him play better (the Crusaders missed him as much as they did Read vs the Lions IMO)

George Carlin wrote:

emack2 wrote:It seems to me a case of all smoke and mirrors,assumptions of the way
each side will play.The weather may have some influence,Refs policeing
of the laws.
Line speed is just another name for offside,hopefully the Ref will not
favour either side.
Given that the areas of maul/scrum/lineout/breakdown where either side
can be pinged for multiple offences it is a lottery.
AS an NZ fan expect a 3=0 series win but expect it to be close

Come on Alan - predict a score, big feller.

carpet baboon wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:What do our NZ posters think about the crotty SBW partnership? Thought LB would get the nod.

4 weeks ago I'd have picked Crotty/ALB as my pairing, but SBW's found form at the right time. Crotty's better on defence than ALB which makes him the better starter I guess - he's also someone who makes those around him play better (the Crusaders missed him as much as they did Read vs the Lions IMO)

Is SBW better at 12 or 13? Or does it matter

Scottrf wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:I doubt many people, other than the coaches, would have picked this team in it's entirety. That would have been the case no matter what and whom they selected. For everyone whinging about AWJ, Farrell, Te'o, JD2, Daly, Williams being in the side, there would be people whinging if they were not. I am worried that too much store has been set for a good performance against a weak Chiefs team, and last minute changes made - but we do not know the thought processes the coached have followed.

I suppose after the game, which we will probably lose fairly comfortably, there will be recriminations along national bias - but just for now we are not English, Welsh or Irish -

WE ARE LIONS*.

Sorry Scots, we do feel your pain - honest.

 Go Lions!

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:I doubt many people, other than the coaches, would have picked this team in it's entirety. That would have been the case no matter what and whom they selected. For everyone whinging about AWJ, Farrell, Te'o, JD2, Daly, Williams being in the side, there would be people whinging if they were not. I am worried that too much store has been set for a good performance against a weak Chiefs team, and last minute changes made - but we do not know the thought processes the coached have followed.

I suppose after the game, which we will probably lose fairly comfortably, there will be recriminations along national bias - but just for now we are not English, Welsh or Irish -

WE ARE LIONS*.

Sorry Scots, we do feel your pain - honest.

 Go Lions!

Are SBW and Farrell not household names in Scotchland? How parachial and backwards are you people? I know its an isolated part of Great Britain (and Ireland) but you really should start paying attention to players who hail from other parts of the country.

I wear my heart on my sleeve on these forums. I always have and I hope I always do.

I'm monumentally jealous of all of you guys.

Kiwis, Irish, English and Welsh posters. It must be a damn exciting time for you seeing all of your household names lined up out there. The once every 4 Lions series is an exciting time. I'm jealous that I feel absolutely severed from the tour now. I'll be watching, and hoping the Lions do well, but I'm not all that bothered about it now, which is frankly gutting.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

I wear my heart on my sleeve on these forums. I always have and I hope I always do.

I'm monumentally jealous of all of you guys.

Kiwis, Irish, English and Welsh posters. It must be a damn exciting time for you seeing all of your household names lined up out there. The once every 4 Lions series is an exciting time. I'm jealous that I feel absolutely severed from the tour now. I'll be watching, and hoping the Lions do well, but I'm not all that bothered about it now, which is frankly gutting.

Kingshu wrote:I can certainly understand Scottish fans frustration the side ranked 5th in the world has zero players in and the side ranked 7th has 8 players.

Personally I think that if Scotland had been playing at the level they have for another year then more players would have forced there way in. 2015 wasn't a good year, 2016 was the transition year and its all coming together in 2017, I think if the Lions tour was next year then we would see more Scots its just come to soon for them. When a team is in transition they are still viewed as being the poor team of 2015 but the players are playing as a team, over time the players will get the recognition that they are good players as well.

George Carlin wrote:Thanks. I think that the main gist of Scotland fans' dissatisfaction is the way that the 6N results were interpreted.

Wales getting well beaten by Scotland was regarded as a blip or an abherration of some kind and almost completely overlooked when selection time came. On the contrary, Scotland's single bad game against England was not regarded as a blip - in fact, it was taken to be a comment about the entire team's worth and potential throughout the entire tournament.

IRB rankings don't lie. However, apparently you can see whatever you want to see in any international result during the 6 Nations.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:You are right in a way Scott but history has shown that Wales wouldn't have defeated Australia at home never mind away which the Scots have just achieved. Small point perhaps.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:You are right in a way Scott but history has shown that Wales wouldn't have defeated Australia at home never mind away which the Scots have just achieved. Small point perhaps.

George Carlin wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:You are right in a way Scott but history has shown that Wales wouldn't have defeated Australia at home never mind away which the Scots have just achieved. Small point perhaps.

Twice in a row.

RDW_Scotland wrote:

George Carlin wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:You are right in a way Scott but history has shown that Wales wouldn't have defeated Australia at home never mind away which the Scots have just achieved. Small point perhaps.

Twice in a row.

it was raining the first time remember - doesn't count

Griff wrote:I think the thing that annoy some Welsh posters is that Scotland fans have been bleating on about beating Wales at home in the 6N and pointing to it being a success story of the 6N campaign.  'We smashed Wales at home', 'we should have more players on tour because we were 5th on the world and you were 7th', 'Watson should have toured because he got the better of your back rowers in that game', etc.  All valid arguments. But in the next breath a lot of Scottish posters say that Wales' players are rubbish and shouldn't be on tour.  So, either you perceive beating Wales as some sort of achievement and therefore consider Wales and the players to be good (why else would it be held up as such an achievement, right?!), OR you've only beaten a sh*t team at home so therefore it isn't really much of an achievement and doesn't point to Scotland's world dominance.  You can't have it both ways - either beating Wales was a success or you've just beaten a really crap team with crap players and finished one place ahead of a crap team in the tournament!

But this was all before you beat Aus, so the point is now moot as you're obviously very good.

EWT Spoons wrote:

Griff wrote:I think the thing that annoy some Welsh posters is that Scotland fans have been bleating on about beating Wales at home in the 6N and pointing to it being a success story of the 6N campaign.  'We smashed Wales at home', 'we should have more players on tour because we were 5th on the world and you were 7th', 'Watson should have toured because he got the better of your back rowers in that game', etc.  All valid arguments. But in the next breath a lot of Scottish posters say that Wales' players are rubbish and shouldn't be on tour.  So, either you perceive beating Wales as some sort of achievement and therefore consider Wales and the players to be good (why else would it be held up as such an achievement, right?!), OR you've only beaten a sh*t team at home so therefore it isn't really much of an achievement and doesn't point to Scotland's world dominance.  You can't have it both ways - either beating Wales was a success or you've just beaten a really crap team with crap players and finished one place ahead of a crap team in the tournament!

But this was all before you beat Aus, so the point is now moot as you're obviously very good.

I don’t think the two things are mutually exclusive, I think the biggest issue is that a (currently) poor Welsh team, have more players touring than an arguably better Scottish team.  The reference for suggesting Scotland are better is because of the 6 nations result.

With that said, I'm not overly upset by the representation, Wales have a number of good/very good players and a case could have been made for any of them going along with the lions.  Having the former (is Gatland going back after the lions?) head coach of Wales and the current head coach, probably ensured they got a better chance than us.

The midweek call ups were a bit galling to be honest even if they are only there to sit on the bench, they are still classed as Lions players with their own unique number, but I don't know the circumstances around why they were chosen.  There might be some truth in Scottish players turning it down, but it would be a strange move considering the wedge of cash they would get for holding a few tackle bags for a week or two.

cascough wrote:Reading these comments I continue to be mystified as to how the Lions is about any one country for some people.

Also this rankings debate, It may tell you how a group of players perform as a team, but its less clear when you're talking about individuals.

If you look at the Welsh involvement for Saturdays game, how many Scottish players can genuinely feel aggrieved?

There are 8 welshmen involved on Saturday. Which Scots do we think should be there instead?

1) Liam Williams - Hogg was selected to tour, unfortunate injury. No injustice there.

2) Leigh Halfpenny - as above.

3) Johnathan Davies - Huw Jones was injured and not in contention. No injustice there.

4) AWJ - the most experienced lock we have. Captained the Lions, and was considered for the captaincy this time around. Question marks over his form, but I can't for the life of me see how AWJ getting picked is an injustice to Scotland.

5) Faletau - One of the best in the world. And showing it. - No injustice there.

6) Webb - Laidlaw has been selected to tour, and has never looked good enough. No injustice there.

7) Warburton - Tour captain, which many acknowledged as the right pick. A huge part of the leadership group. People may have wanted Watson to tour, but He would have still been an outside bet for a test spot in many peoples eyes.

8) Owens - One of the only welshman to emerge with credit from the 6N, and has been very good on tour. If it were a straight shootout between Brown and Owens for tour selection, I think the consensus would be that Owens was the better player.

I know people are throwing out blanket statements about Scotland's lack of involvement, but I just can't see where they think it should be different. There are some marginal calls perhaps, but thats just what they are. Marginal. Why the furore?

robbo277 wrote:I still think Gatland was trying to shield either them or himself from the backlash a little. I'd be fairly confident in predicting that any selected on the bench next week will get a quick run.

After all, on a Tuesday between two test matches, who's going to be talking about Wales' 4th choice lock getting 15 minutes against the Hurricanes?

cascough wrote:Reading these comments I continue to be mystified as to how the Lions is about any one country for some people.

Also this rankings debate, It may tell you how a group of players perform as a team, but its less clear when you're talking about individuals.

If you look at the Welsh involvement for Saturdays game, how many Scottish players can genuinely feel aggrieved?

There are 8 welshmen involved on Saturday. Which Scots do we think should be there instead?

1) Liam Williams - Hogg was selected to tour, unfortunate injury. No injustice there.

2) Leigh Halfpenny - as above.

3) Johnathan Davies - Huw Jones was injured and not in contention. No injustice there.

4) AWJ - the most experienced lock we have. Captained the Lions, and was considered for the captaincy this time around. Question marks over his form, but I can't for the life of me see how AWJ getting picked is an injustice to Scotland.

5) Faletau - One of the best in the world. And showing it. - No injustice there.

6) Webb - Laidlaw has been selected to tour, and has never looked good enough. No injustice there.

7) Warburton - Tour captain, which many acknowledged as the right pick. A huge part of the leadership group. People may have wanted Watson to tour, but He would have still been an outside bet for a test spot in many peoples eyes.

8) Owens - One of the only welshman to emerge with credit from the 6N, and has been very good on tour. If it were a straight shootout between Brown and Owens for tour selection, I think the consensus would be that Owens was the better player.

I know people are throwing out blanket statements about Scotland's lack of involvement, but I just can't see where they think it should be different. There are some marginal calls perhaps, but thats just what they are. Marginal. Why the furore?

George Carlin wrote:

cascough wrote:Reading these comments I continue to be mystified as to how the Lions is about any one country for some people.

Also this rankings debate, It may tell you how a group of players perform as a team, but its less clear when you're talking about individuals.

If you look at the Welsh involvement for Saturdays game, how many Scottish players can genuinely feel aggrieved?

There are 8 welshmen involved on Saturday. Which Scots do we think should be there instead?

1) Liam Williams - Hogg was selected to tour, unfortunate injury. No injustice there.

2) Leigh Halfpenny - as above.

3) Johnathan Davies - Huw Jones was injured and not in contention. No injustice there.

4) AWJ - the most experienced lock we have. Captained the Lions, and was considered for the captaincy this time around. Question marks over his form, but I can't for the life of me see how AWJ getting picked is an injustice to Scotland.

5) Faletau - One of the best in the world. And showing it. - No injustice there.

6) Webb - Laidlaw has been selected to tour, and has never looked good enough. No injustice there.

7) Warburton - Tour captain, which many acknowledged as the right pick. A huge part of the leadership group. People may have wanted Watson to tour, but He would have still been an outside bet for a test spot in many peoples eyes.

8) Owens - One of the only welshman to emerge with credit from the 6N, and has been very good on tour. If it were a straight shootout between Brown and Owens for tour selection, I think the consensus would be that Owens was the better player.

I know people are throwing out blanket statements about Scotland's lack of involvement, but I just can't see where they think it should be different. There are some marginal calls perhaps, but thats just what they are. Marginal. Why the furore?

The prejudice happened during selection - it doesn't mean a great deal to list the Welsh players who are already touring.

cascough wrote:I know people are throwing out blanket statements about Scotland's lack of involvement, but I just can't see where they think it should be different. There are some marginal calls perhaps, but thats just what they are. Marginal. Why the furore?

cascough wrote:

I know people are throwing out blanket statements about Scotland's lack of involvement, but I just can't see where they think it should be different. There are some marginal calls perhaps, but thats just what they are. Marginal. Why the furore?

LondonTiger wrote:

cascough wrote:I know people are throwing out blanket statements about Scotland's lack of involvement, but I just can't see where they think it should be different. There are some marginal calls perhaps, but thats just what they are. Marginal. Why the furore?

While this has been done to death in the past, I guess internet forums would be very quiet places if we did not rehash things forever.

The problem really comes down to what the Lions means in this day and age, and how people choose to identify with it. Following sports teams can be quite a tribal thing often with fierce rivalries. These rivalries can be seen every spring when 6Ns comes around. Then every four years we are asked to get behind the concept of the British and Irish Lions and put all those rivalries aside. If you feel a connection to the team that can happen, but such a connection is an emotional and personal one and cannot (nor should not) be dictated by anyone else.

Usually supporting a national side will be linked to your own national identity. The Lions is a whole different thing though. If you identify as British then it may be a lot easier to feel a connection with the team than if you identify as English,Scottish or Welsh (ignoring the "I" part as that is a whole new set of issues). It is very easy for Welsh or English fans to denigrate and patronise Scottish fans as with the representation we have in the touring party it is easy to feel that it represents us. As we have seen, there will still be bickering about whether the right players are in the Test team, but overall we can feel that the tour is representative of us.

If the Lions are meant to represent British and Irish rugby, then ideally so should the squad. I am not talking about equal contributions, but that the fans of any specific country need to feel that their players are getting a fair crack of the whip, and not losing out on all the 50/50 calls.  

If the Lions is about winning test matches - well the concept is probably doomed as the pragmatic way to try and achieve that would alienate many and thus put at risk what seems to be the real current purpose of the Lions - to serve as a cash cow.

I fully understand why Scottish fans can feel alienated as despite being a fan of the Lions, I am sure I would struggle to maintain my interest if English representation in the entire initial touring party amounted to two parts of diddly squat. I certainly know that my interest in the England team waned in the mid 80s when the selectors too often ignored whole swathes of the country, and would wane again if Eddie Jones brought in too many time-servers or gotta-grannies.


Thus in short, if a representative group, fails to be representative it is to be expected that people will be alienated.