NEW ZEALAND v BRITISH & IRISH LIONS, 1 July

First topic message reminder :

                   
NEW ZEALAND v BRITISH & IRISH LIONS  
1 July 2017
KO: 19:35 NZST (8.35am BST)
WESTPAC Wellington Regional Stadium, Wellington

Live on Sky Sports HD

Referee: Jérôme Garcès (France)
ARs: [tbc]
TMO: [tbc]

A. Head to Head

39 Played 39
30 Won 6
3 Drawn 3
6 Lost 30
664 Points 360

B. Recent Form

24 June 2017
Eden Park, Auckland
30 – 15 to New Zealand

9 July 2005 
Eden Park, Auckland 
38 – 19 to New Zealand 

2 July 2005 
Westpac Stadium, Wellington 
48 – 18 to New Zealand

25 June 2005 
Lancaster Park, Christchurch 
21 – 3 to New Zealand

3 July 1993 
Eden Park, Auckland 
30 – 13 to New Zealand 

26 June 1993 
Athletic Park, Wellington 
7 – 20 to British & Irish Lions

12 June 1993 
Lancaster Park, Christchurch 
20 – 18 to New Zealand

16 July 1983 
Eden Park, Auckland 
38 – 6 to New Zealand

2 July 1983 
Carisbrook, Dunedin 
15 – 8 to New Zealand

18 June 1983 
Athletic Park (Wellington), Wellington 
9 – 0 to New Zealand

4 June 1983 
Lancaster Park, Christchurch 
16 – 12 to New Zealand

C. TEAMS:

NEW ZEALAND

[tbc]

BRITISH & IRISH LIONS  

[tbc]

Gooseberry wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:
Did the Lions play better and did some of the changes come off? Yes

That's an overwhelming no. Lions were awful. Were much better in the first test.

Well I disagree there, although maybe being a man up was the reason they looked better. You cant deny that the second row and back row looked way more effective, and AWJ looked like a test player this time around.

I would have to re-disagree

That was one of the worst performances I have seen from a test side. Incompetitance for 60 mins, and ok for 20

Just lucky that the All Blacks really were not much better - but they were better and if they had a kicker who could kick in front of the sticks, would have been dune and dusted

Our second row was second best again and was only pro-active in the first 10 mins

The amount of stupid play was unbelievable

I really worry that this will paper over the cracks and no changes will be made and the undropables will be undropped

That was against 14 men and we still were second best

LordDowlais wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Gatland doesn't drop Mako. Two of his four penalties were for fairly cheap shots on Barrett. Gatland is the sort of coach that probably encourages that sort of fairly negative rugby. Its not uncommon for Gatland sides to have that sort of thing as part of their game plan.

What ? Is this a tactic you see used by Wales then ? I agree with your comment about negative tactics, but cheap shots ? Come on.

Even if he was "under orders" then he deserves dropping for getting caught twice and not injuring the guy.

For what its worth its pretty clear they were told to go out and be more physical and scrap more, the near brawls form the off (notably AWJ getting in on it after looking like a wet lettuce the previous week) show they were looking to "front up" a bit more. Gatland made it quite clear he wasnt happy with how passive they were in the first test.
That though is very diffewrnet to going out and playing dirty and looking for cheap shots. As with the controversy over the late hit on Murray last week I dont believe the players genuinely intended to out and target foul play on others looking for injuries. Its just theres a very fine line between being up for a scrap and going for hard play and staying on the right side of safe and legal.
Some players just dont have the head for it, and Mako showed that. A lack of self discpline. You wonder how a guy like Hartley might've gone in such an atmoshere, or indeed the possible replacement for Mako ...Marler.
I cant see how he can be persisted with though, hes either going to be holding back too much next week or too obvious a target for a wind up.

If the Lions are going to have a decent chance they need to improve massively on discipline whether Barrett can kick or not.

BamBam wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

BamBam wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

BamBam wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Interesting.

Where are the likes of BamBam and beshocked ?

They have been all over this forum when the Lions are losing, now these members are all in hiding.

Well it was the weekend and i was away, is that ok with you? I appreciate your carpet empire can't possibly function without you so you struggle to get away from your laptop and the forum

Wifi was down was it BamBam?

Possibly, as I don't live in a Welsh backwater I got mine fixed in two days, usually takes a few months (or to the next round of internationals) for you lot

I actually prefer not to comment until I've seen something of a game

Yeah that makes sense. So, do you reckon Gatland will steer the Lions to another win against NZ?

I'd be delighted to see us win.

If we do, Gatland deserves the credit for seeing his original game plan was wrong, he made the change to put Itoje in and use the Sexton-Farrell combo - for that he deserves credit

I still think he's completely wrong to select a particular Welsh lock, which is most of my criticism of him

Me too, but I was asking if you reckon we could win? Do you have a prediction? I'm willing to bet 7 carpet-fittings plus labour on a Lions series win.

I'm not sure if the game plan was wrong, I can't tell the difference in game plans? Difference being is that the players make too many errors, but seemed to be make less errors in the 2nd test.

AWJ was good in the 2nd test, but I think it's time to give him a rest now. Lawes and Henderson deserve to be in the mix.

Head says NZ win, heart says Lions

Gambling head wins and says NZ by 5 - 7 carpet fittings is great odds, tough to turn down

Game plan difference mainly comes from having Farrell at 12 - you give a bit on the gainline but offer a threat further out, plus the tactical kicking

mikey_dragon wrote:
I'm willing to bet 7 carpet-fittings plus labour on a Lions series win.

Can't we make it money?

Put up an evens offer on the Betfair exchange and I'll take it.

The ABs are the most successful sporting team the world has ever seen.

But no team can dominate indefinitely, and the two loses in the past 12 months may be a sign of decline.

The next game will really define where they are at. If they lose the series there will be a lot of soul searching in NZ but it wouldn't surprise me if they wipe the floor with the Lions either and if so it will be business as usual.

It has surprised me though that with the forward platform and territory they have had that they haven't really created much against the Lions and defensively thy have looked vulnerable in both tests.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:


I agreee with that up to the point you say Sexton is much better equipped to deal with big players running at him. His history would suggest that he usually deals with it by hobbling off at 60 minutes and the coach whinging to the media.

Thats perfectly fine if Sexton only lasts 60 minutes by that time Farrell will be ready to come in and throw his one good pass and close the game out. At least the Lions may be in a position to win this time.

It was a good pass tbf

It was far from a great performance but they won and that's all that matters; Itoje coming in for Kruis made a big difference, he plays on the edge and gets pinged a fair bit but his physicality and exuberance are worth their weight in gold. The defensive effort that he, Lawes and Sinckler put in around the 70 minute mark was massive.

AWJ fronted up this game it must be said, he's not been at his best this tour but he seemed have some of the bite of old that had been missing.

Sean O'Brien though was head and shoulders above the rest, he carried and tackled hard all game.

I think people in general are looking at the stats for points scored against yellow cards and assuming you should just blow teams away. I get that but in any team sport psychology plays a huge effect. When a football team goes a man down, they either get drubbed or make it really difficult. It comes down to mindsets. The longer they hold on, the more belief they get and the more the other team with the extra man panics.

It looked to me watching that the mindsets of the two teams changed with the sending off. The lions had started well, they looked pumped and had a challenger mentality. After sbw's departure, suddenly they were favourites. The all blacks were forced to play tight keep ball, the lions got frustrated at lack of possession and kept making poor decisions... one leads to another.

In times like these you need leaders on the pitch, we didn't show that. When mako gets binned suddenly the dynamic changes again.

The lions won the game when numbers were even 15-15 and 14-14 and were outplayed when it was 15-14.

I'm not saying it means that the lions will win if they don't have a spare man on Saturday! I just think the circumstances of last weekend cloud the analysis.

The Lions aren't no- hopers on Saturday, they need parity in the pack and the breakdown. IF they get it they have a chance. To me they've looked the match of the ABs when they've had the ball in hand. The ABs took advantage of defensive howlers well in the first test but they haven't looked their usual try scoring machine and they had a ton of ball. Conditions haven't helped but the lions have been solid defensively.

If the ABs get on a roll they can run up a cricket score against anyone, but I'm expecting a competitive test match. Think the doom and gloom hand is being over-played here.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Gatland doesn't drop Mako. Two of his four penalties were for fairly cheap shots on Barrett. Gatland is the sort of coach that probably encourages that sort of fairly negative rugby. Its not uncommon for Gatland sides to have that sort of thing as part of their game plan.

What ? Is this a tactic you see used by Wales then ? I agree with your comment about negative tactics, but cheap shots ? Come on.

You dont think elbowing Barrett in the face when he is lying on the ground is a cheap shot? No time for that crap, we can beat the ABs without that.

So you are basing what Mako did in one game, and was then given the shepherds crook, to a whole career of a coach ? Gatland has been Wales coach for a decade now, and Wales do not have a history of dishing out cheap shots.

BamBam wrote:Head says NZ win, heart says Lions

Gambling head wins and says NZ by 5 - 7 carpet fittings is great odds, tough to turn down

Game plan difference mainly comes from having Farrell at 12 - you give a bit on the gainline but offer a threat further out, plus the tactical kicking

Nothing against Farrell but I'd put him on the bench and have Murray, Sexton and Te'o starting. I just think the Lions need a few tactical changes. Lawes to come in at lock with Henderson to the bench.

Perhaps not so much Wales but in the six nations Welsh backrow forwards were guilty of late hits on both Farrell and Sexton.

Every team attempts late hits on the opposition 10, that's pretty much a requirement if you're in the backrow!!

yappysnap wrote:Every team attempts late hits on the opposition 10, that's pretty much a requirement if you're in the backrow!!

Not really. Not a fan. Cheap tactics.

yappysnap wrote:Every team attempts late hits on the opposition 10, that's pretty much a requirement if you're in the backrow!!

Yep - It's line 1 in the job description

Everyone tries to time it just right so you're committed to the tackle as a 9 ot 10 is passing the ball. Not sure many coaches are encouraging late tackles!

GunsGermsV2 wrote:Perhaps not so much Wales but in the six nations Welsh backrow forwards were guilty of late hits on both Farrell and Sexton.

Im trying to think of game involving any team where that hasnt happened

Have to ask, does anyone else think Gatland was wrong not to use his bench more, especially for the forwards?

Against 14 men its best to bring on fresh legs to tire them and push gaps, target tired shoulders with fresh players etc.

SOB and Faletau, were playing great, but Stander was sat on the bench the whole game, while SOB and Faletau have been playing better a fresh Stander should offer more physicality than a 70 min tired SOB and Faletau.

Same with Owens and George. Hookers rarely play 80 mins in the modern game.

Or is it best to disrupt the team as little as possible, after all it takes players time to gel, and with the short time the Lions have together, changes may not be smooth as other teams, and you cannot risk someone taking time to settle in?

Kingshu wrote:Have to ask, does anyone else think Gatland was wrong not to use his bench more, especially for the forwards?

Against 14 men its best to bring on fresh legs to tire them and push gaps, target tired shoulders with fresh players etc.

Id agree with that. The big advantage of playing up in numbers for so long is fatigue. Waiting longer on the replacements evens that out.
We saw from the midweek match just what an impact fresh legs can have if the opposition doesnt use their bench, and its rare not to use all the forward replacements now.
Its fair enough if they had absolute dominance in set piece and open play, but they didnt. Or indeed if they had 17th choice emergency injury cover on the bench ...but again they didnt. Not bringing on Stander seems odd, and I cant think George has played 80 minutes under any circumstances many times in his career.

Gooseberry wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:Perhaps not so much Wales but in the six nations Welsh backrow forwards were guilty of late hits on both Farrell and Sexton.

Im trying to think of game involving any team where that hasnt happened

Lewis Moody and Betsen literally made careers out of it.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Murray and Itoje really stepped up last 20 min and we're both great in that time. I am disappointed that there seemed to be no collective thought after the red as to what to do. Kicking was poorly used especially with Murray Sexton Farrell and Daly all there. I'd agree vunipola should be on the bench.  It's where's he's most effective anyway.

The New Zealand Herald gave Itoje a 4 in their Player Ratings:

4. Maro Itoje - 4
Looked static at times and dropped ball on attack early. Caught offside in 44th minute as he struggled to acclimatise.

If Gatland wanted to get more out of Murray's kicking game he should use more of the Irish players who are very good at reclaiming those kicks.

Yes I did see the player rating for Itoje. ..comical isn't it!?

Personally I'm. Not a huge fan of constantly kicking away possession when you have the advantage of players being in the bin (permanently) but at a stretch fair enough given the weather. The kicks were on the whole too long though.

Ps I also enjoyed the wales online comment that Jones acted as Itoje s minder!

yappysnap wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:Perhaps not so much Wales but in the six nations Welsh backrow forwards were guilty of late hits on both Farrell and Sexton.

Im trying to think of game involving any team where that hasnt happened

Lewis Moody and Betsen literally made careers out of it.

That reminds me of the Ray Gravell line: 'get your first tackle in early, even if it's late.'

I really do seem to have watched a different game from most, as I thought Itoje was poor

Great in the line out and kick off catches, but very little else

I think sometimes these catches (like someone getting a place kick) seems to colour the perception of their overall game

But that is my opinion :-)

The disruption of the mauls. Tackles. Leadership which was lacking from elsewhere. The guys just quality. You must have been watching the same game as the herald guys!

No 7&1/2 wrote:The disruption of the mauls. Tackles. Leadership which was lacking from elsewhere.

All because AWJ was carrying him .

I keep wondering how we could have played so badly with all this great performances and leadership

We were woeful and should have lost by a clear margin against 14 men

People keep saying how the 10-12 axis opened up the defences and also broguht us so much better ball

Where?? our 2 tries were good, but that was about it

This game has papered over huge cracks in a team that struggled to put away 14 men, lost the up front battle (again) against 14 men and were second best for 60 mins of that game

I dispair at the over enthusium of our ability....... after that game.

Ah well, it seems that we go from boom to bust so easilty

So I hear mikey. He's got to be careful he'll do his back in at his age.

Sin é wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Murray and Itoje really stepped up last 20 min and we're both great in that time. I am disappointed that there seemed to be no collective thought after the red as to what to do. Kicking was poorly used especially with Murray Sexton Farrell and Daly all there. I'd agree vunipola should be on the bench.  It's where's he's most effective anyway.

The New Zealand Herald gave Itoje a 4 in their Player Ratings:

4. Maro Itoje - 4
Looked static at times and dropped ball on attack early. Caught offside in 44th minute as he struggled to acclimatise.

If Gatland wanted to get more out of Murray's kicking game he should use more of the Irish players who are very good at reclaiming those kicks.

Apparently they didn't.....

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=11884837

Maro Itoje 9

Gobbled up All Black re-starts, plenty of runs, tackled his heart out. Has the X-factor.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Sin é wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Murray and Itoje really stepped up last 20 min and we're both great in that time. I am disappointed that there seemed to be no collective thought after the red as to what to do. Kicking was poorly used especially with Murray Sexton Farrell and Daly all there. I'd agree vunipola should be on the bench.  It's where's he's most effective anyway.

The New Zealand Herald gave Itoje a 4 in their Player Ratings:

4. Maro Itoje - 4
Looked static at times and dropped ball on attack early. Caught offside in 44th minute as he struggled to acclimatise.

If Gatland wanted to get more out of Murray's kicking game he should use more of the Irish players who are very good at reclaiming those kicks.

Apparently they didn't.....

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=11884837

Maro Itoje 9

Gobbled up All Black re-starts, plenty of runs, tackled his heart out. Has the X-factor.

Not apparent about the 4 rating - here is the link

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11884720

Strange.....

Chris Rattue wrote the one where Itoje is a 9. Strange that there's two versions of the same article/story from the same herald.

I'm more inclined to agree with Rattue, his rating of Barrett is spot on.

mikey_dragon wrote:Chris Rattue wrote the one where Itoje is a 9. Strange that there's two versions of the same article/story from the same herald.

I'm more inclined to agree with Rattue, his rating of Barrett is spot on.

Had Rattue it spot on when he wrote that 'Wales were the village ediots of rugby union'?

Sin é wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Chris Rattue wrote the one where Itoje is a 9. Strange that there's two versions of the same article/story from the same herald.

I'm more inclined to agree with Rattue, his rating of Barrett is spot on.

Had Rattue it spot on when he wrote that 'Wales were the village ediots of rugby union'?

Back then yeah, the tag belongs to the English now though.

Never seen Rattue and Boris Johnson in the ssme room. Im not saying they are the same person but ....

It wasn't a 4 or a 9. The 4 is just odd though. Smacks of a stephen jones type of wum.

No 7&1/2 wrote:It wasn't a 4 or a 9. The 4 is just odd though. Smacks of a stephen jones type of wum.

Why? 4 should be slightly worse than average. Instead you're a 6 unless you're MOTM or dreadful. So player ratings are pointless.

No 7&1/2 wrote:It wasn't a 4 or a 9. The 4 is just odd though. Smacks of a stephen jones type of wum.

Yeah he is probably somewhere in between. I liked the 1014's review. They said Itoje is a great player and played really well but sometimes needs to reign in the over exuberance, something similar for Sinkler.

The dicipline was so bad on Saturday cheap shots must have formed part of the game plan IMO. not necessary.

The Lions are in Queenstown at the moment. Hope the English players behave themselves.

Scott I agree and Itoje despite a couple of pens was good and then very good towards the end of the game. I do intend to rewatch it without the nerves if I get time over the next couple of days but to me he's always in the right place. Massive nuisance at the breakdown. So physical yet with the decision making of someone years older. So the 4 is odd to me as clearly he was one of the best on the pitch. Not a 9 though, don't think anyone was.

If anybody does get the chance to re-watch the game, I have seen it 3 times now.

Take a chance to have a look at how many rucks Sam Warburton was involved in just being a nuisance. I am not his biggest fan, but he was very effective with slowing New Zealand ball down on Saturday.

LordDowlais wrote:If anybody does get the chance to re-watch the game, I have seen it 3 times now.

Take a chance to have a look at how many rucks Sam Warburton was involved in just being a nuisance. I am not his biggest fan, but he was very effective with slowing New Zealand ball down on Saturday.

Lord, somebody on a different Forum said he watched the game on a NZ channel with their commentators and pundits, (didn't name them) they were saying exactly the same thing in commentary as yourself, said Sam was outstanding. I'm a bit like you I prefer Tips to him, but fair play good on Sam.

Thought that Warburton put in a very solid shift myself. Was just concerned with the amount of penalties he gave away (3?) and I did not think he got into the teams ear enough (especially Mako) to calm them down when heads were being lost.

Now we just need to compete 3 vs 2 in the backrow again to have a chance next week.

eirebilly wrote:Thought that Warburton put in a very solid shift myself. Was just concerned with the amount of penalties he gave away (3?) and I did not think he got into the teams ear enough (especially Mako) to calm them down when heads were being lost.

Agree with that. Warburton is a very good player but not a captain.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:
Agree with that. Warburton is a very good player but not a captain.

You criticise Warburton for not galvanising his troops, then champion Best who must be one of the meekest rugby players around.

Scottrf wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:
Agree with that. Warburton is a very good player but not a captain.

You criticise Warburton for not galvanising his troops, then champion Best who must be one of the meekest rugby players around.

Haha Best, meek? WTF. Watch any Ireland game he is well able to rally his troops, make key decisions and lead from the front. He has also done a very good job captaining the Lions on two occasions. Meek definitely isnt the right word.

Scottrf wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:
Agree with that. Warburton is a very good player but not a captain.

You criticise Warburton for not galvanising his troops, then champion Best who must be one of the meekest rugby players around.

Best is actually an excellent Captain (once you get passed his voice ). He is also one of the best scrummaging hookers in rugby. People say his line out is weak but I do not see it as being weak, he is exactly the player to get the Lions more parity in the scrum.

I think that Warburton a very good squad captain but not necessarily the best on field captain. For me, Farrell and Sexton are the two best leaders in the test squad.

Yeah his voice is a bit of a handicap. Probably why the lineout calls dont go well. Brits cant understand him.