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:

marty2086 wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:This is a good read (once you ignore the clickbait headline) https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/94261141/lions-prop-mako-vunipola-says-he-did-grab-owen-franks-testicles-in-first-test

Some pretty rubbish journalism, he supported the ABs because he watched them and loved them mainly because of Lomu and the great

New Zealand-born, Wales-raised, England prop of Tongan descent

Reporter writes down something player said shocker

No he made a conclusion based on that statement, I loved the ABs and watched but it doesn't mean I supported them

Err the conlcussion was based on Makos statement which is quaoted belwo it in which he says exactly that.

I think its justifiable to jump to conslussions based on what people say about themselves.

Where does he say he supported them?

Unless it's changed it doesn't say it.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Unless it's changed it doesn't say it.

It does talk about his "years as an ABs fan". Which frankly isn't an unreasonable conclusion from "When I was growing up I admit I used to watch the All Blacks and be in love with them".

Just Marty over-reacting. Nothing new there.

Yeah someone farted under the sheets

Bit of a stretch that.

Mako is emack and I claim my five pounds.

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Unless it's changed it doesn't say it.

It does talk about his "years as an ABs fan". Which frankly isn't an unreasonable conclusion from "When I was growing up I admit I used to watch the All Blacks and be in love with them".

Just Marty over-reacting. Nothing new there.

Hardly an overreaction, who didn't love watching that team? Well except for Mike Catt

As stated I was the same as Mako, doesn't mean I supported them

That conclusion was in conjunction with the pretty pathetic NZ born crapola he came off with

Typical Kiwi arrogance and trying to run others down

You're typical marty

ebop wrote:You're typical marty

Yeah that makes loads of sense, well argued

You get that from a 5 year old?

So are we getting another two pages of bickering over something rather inconsequential?

marty2086 wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Unless it's changed it doesn't say it.

It does talk about his "years as an ABs fan". Which frankly isn't an unreasonable conclusion from "When I was growing up I admit I used to watch the All Blacks and be in love with them".

Just Marty over-reacting. Nothing new there.

Hardly an overreaction, who didn't love watching that team? Well except for Mike Catt

As stated I was the same as Mako, doesn't mean I supported them

That conclusion was in conjunction with the pretty pathetic NZ born crapola he came off with

Typical Kiwi arrogance and trying to run others down

And you can be a fan without being a supporter Marty - you're jumping to conclusions up on that high horse.


Mako was born in Wellington - true fact. And he was back in Wellington for the first time in years - the reporter's doing a nice wee segue on it. It's also true that he has a Welsh accent - I'm sorry if that upsets you. The article also rightly dismisses that whole squirrel grip thing as a nothing incident that only the worst NZ fans (we have our share, just like everyone else) have tried to make anything of.

Typical Irish Marty histrionics over nothing.

LondonTiger wrote:So are we getting another two pages of bickering over something rather inconsequential?

marty overbeating the egg again

LondonTiger wrote:So are we getting another two pages of bickering over something rather inconsequential?

Seems so, apparently you can't point out bad journalism from a Kiwi now

We can add it to high hits, spear tackles, offside, going off your feet and ABs not being born in NZ

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:So are we getting another two pages of bickering over something rather inconsequential?

marty overbeating the egg again

I pointed out the shoddy journalism that contradicted the original post of it being a good read, forgot the angry pack mentality of the Kiwis

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:So are we getting another two pages of bickering over something rather inconsequential?

marty overbeating the egg again

I pointed out the shoddy journalism that contradicted the original post of it being a good read, forgot the angry pack mentality of the Kiwis

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:So are we getting another two pages of bickering over something rather inconsequential?

marty overbeating the egg again

I pointed out the shoddy journalism that contradicted the original post of it being a good read, forgot the angry pack mentality of the Kiwis

You sucked the fun out of a humorous story

Good work

ebop wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:So are we getting another two pages of bickering over something rather inconsequential?

marty overbeating the egg again

I pointed out the shoddy journalism that contradicted the original post of it being a good read, forgot the angry pack mentality of the Kiwis

You sucked the fun out of a humorous story

Good work

I thought it was the Kiwi oversensitivity to criticism that did that

Lol this forum is embarrassing sometimes. What are people arguing about again? Whether Mako supported NZ when he was growing up? Yawn.

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:So are we getting another two pages of bickering over something rather inconsequential?

marty overbeating the egg again

I pointed out the shoddy journalism that contradicted the original post of it being a good read, forgot the angry pack mentality of the Kiwis

You sucked the fun out of a humorous story

Good work

I thought it was the Kiwi oversensitivity to criticism that did that

Actually, I think you'll find that most people that are doing the thing are thinking 'who the f**k cares who Mako supported as a five year old kid'

marty does

ebop wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:So are we getting another two pages of bickering over something rather inconsequential?

marty overbeating the egg again

I pointed out the shoddy journalism that contradicted the original post of it being a good read, forgot the angry pack mentality of the Kiwis

You sucked the fun out of a humorous story

Good work

I thought it was the Kiwi oversensitivity to criticism that did that

Actually, I think you'll find that most people that are doing the thing are thinking 'who the f**k cares who Mako supported as a five year old kid'

marty does

I don't give a £uck who he supported, merely pointing out the trash reporting that's why I highlighted the NZ born, Welsh raised.... line too

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:So are we getting another two pages of bickering over something rather inconsequential?

marty overbeating the egg again

I pointed out the shoddy journalism that contradicted the original post of it being a good read, forgot the angry pack mentality of the Kiwis

You sucked the fun out of a humorous story

Good work

I thought it was the Kiwi oversensitivity to criticism that did that

Actually, I think you'll find that most people that are doing the thing are thinking 'who the f**k cares who Mako supported as a five year old kid'

marty does

I don't give a £uck who he supported, merely pointing out the trash reporting that's why I highlighted the NZ born, Welsh raised.... line too

Good for you

And still no one cares

ebop wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:So are we getting another two pages of bickering over something rather inconsequential?

marty overbeating the egg again

I pointed out the shoddy journalism that contradicted the original post of it being a good read, forgot the angry pack mentality of the Kiwis

You sucked the fun out of a humorous story

Good work

I thought it was the Kiwi oversensitivity to criticism that did that

Actually, I think you'll find that most people that are doing the thing are thinking 'who the f**k cares who Mako supported as a five year old kid'

marty does

I don't give a £uck who he supported, merely pointing out the trash reporting that's why I highlighted the NZ born, Welsh raised.... line too

Good for you

And still no one cares

Really? Yet you and others seemed too

Funny that

Apparently there is quite an important game of rugby union football at the weekend. I almost forgot about it whilst reading this load of drivel covering the previous two pages of this thread.
Could we possibly get back to discussing the game, or it that too much to ask until nurse Ratchet applies the appropriate medication to those concerned in the previous riveting conversation about Mako's early tv watching habits ?

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:So are we getting another two pages of bickering over something rather inconsequential?

marty overbeating the egg again

I pointed out the shoddy journalism that contradicted the original post of it being a good read, forgot the angry pack mentality of the Kiwis

Especially that Devil Kiwi guy who is rouge. He is always angry and I am sure he moves around in a pack, they can it a bevy of devils

sensisball wrote:Apparently there is quite an important game of rugby union football at the weekend.

Are you sure? I seem to be unable to find any evidence of such a game

It's true. USA vs canada. WC place up for grabs.

NO Cyril there is only one EMACK 2 your worst nightmare
be afraid,be very afraid As to the Lions give it a go you`ve
nothing to lose.
Fact losing 1966 Lions side was better than the winning 1971 side,
BUT the ABs 1963-8 was among the best AB side EVER,the 1970`s
sides were among the weaker ones see results for proof of that.

emack2 wrote:NO Cyril there is only one EMACK 2 your worst nightmare
be afraid,be very afraid As to the Lions give it a go you`ve
nothing to lose.
Fact losing 1966 Lions side was better than the winning 1971 side,
BUT the ABs 1963-8 was among the best AB side EVER,the 1970`s
sides were among the weaker ones see results for proof of that.

Speaking of '71, it's worth tracking down footage of Ian Kirkpatrick's try against the Lions in the second Test. I don't know how many players he beats, but it's ridiculous.

Having re-watched the 1st test again this morning, I continue to find it absolutely astonishing that AWJ is not only retained in the match day squad but is a starter.

Both him and Kruis were poor and there are 3 better in form locks in the squad in Itoje, Lawes and Henderson. I simply cannot see any reason for his inclusion.

Warburton in for POM with POM dropping out of the matchday 23 is harsh on POM but it is not a drop in quality as Warburton is an excellent player in his own right.

The selection of Sexton and Farrell at 10-12 is a massive mistake in my mind. Te'o has been excellent and has linked up very well with Davies. Farrell is a solid defender but he is nowhere near as strong as Te'o and SBW may have a field day there.

emack2 wrote:Fact losing 1966 Lions side was better than the winning 1971 side.

Opinion, not fact.

It is my opinion that you are wrong. Campbell-Lamerton was a major weakness, the likes of Willie John and Mike Gibson were better players by 71 than in 66, and the 71 team includes far more all time greats (though admittedly some were early in their careers).

eirebilly wrote:Having re-watched the 1st test again this morning, I continue to find it absolutely astonishing that AWJ is not only retained in the match day squad but is a starter.

Both him and Kruis were poor and there are 3 better in form locks in the squad in Itoje, Lawes and Henderson. I simply cannot see any reason for his inclusion.

Warburton in for POM with POM dropping out of the matchday 23 is harsh on POM but it is not a drop in quality as Warburton is an excellent player in his own right.

The selection of Sexton and Farrell at 10-12 is a massive mistake in my mind. Te'o has been excellent and has linked up very well with Davies. Farrell is a solid defender  but he is nowhere near as strong as Te'o and SBW may have a field day there.

It is harsh on POM as it wasnt a bad shift but something had to give, we were dominated in the forwards. SOB and Faletau were lucky to survive the chop probably only because they are more physical than POM.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

eirebilly wrote:Having re-watched the 1st test again this morning, I continue to find it absolutely astonishing that AWJ is not only retained in the match day squad but is a starter.

Both him and Kruis were poor and there are 3 better in form locks in the squad in Itoje, Lawes and Henderson. I simply cannot see any reason for his inclusion.

Warburton in for POM with POM dropping out of the matchday 23 is harsh on POM but it is not a drop in quality as Warburton is an excellent player in his own right.

The selection of Sexton and Farrell at 10-12 is a massive mistake in my mind. Te'o has been excellent and has linked up very well with Davies. Farrell is a solid defender  but he is nowhere near as strong as Te'o and SBW may have a field day there.

It is harsh on POM as it wasnt a bad shift but something had to give, we were dominated in the forwards. SOB and Faletau were lucky to survive the chop probably only because they are more physical than POM.

I have to agree that POM is unlucky, but I didn't see him being as big a nuisance as he can be. Let's be honest, we need 9 or 10 out of 10 performances across the board to beat this NZ side. I hope that tomorrow ends with a Lions win, whoever stars, from whatever nation.

The opinion was that of Colin Meads who played against both sides,Campbell
-lamerton was captain because of tradition.
Winning Home Nations captain if selected were named Lions captains,Alun
Pask may have been the preferred Captain otherwise.
Mike Gibson was THE best 10 in N H maybe even the world in1971,Barry
John?he was a footnote between Dai Watkins and Phil Bennett.
THE great Welsh side?they were given a bath in 1969 in NZ,Wales and
France were THE leading sides in 1970`s.France won several v NZ
Wales didn't in that decade.

A few stats:

* The Lions made more clean breaks than the All Blacks in the first Test (15 to 12) despite having just 38% of overall possession.

* The Lions haven't won the second Test of a three-match series since their successful tour of South Africa in 1997.

* The All Blacks have a handy winning record at Westpac Stadium. Their last loss there was at the hands of Sir Clive Woodward's England in 2003.

http://www.espn.co.uk/rugby/preview?gameId=290602&league=268565

433 posts so far, with less than 10% relating to tomorrow's game.

What needs to happen for the Lions to pull off a shock win?

1) NZ to be off colour
2) French ref to favour Lions scrummage
3) Lions to dominate teh breakdown (again aybe with help of NH interpretations?)
4) Itoje to steal some lineout.
5) Lions to take all their chances.


Is that enough?

The Lions have also played nicer rugby and scored nicer tries than all sides except the Blues.

LondonTiger wrote:433 posts so far, with less than 10% relating to tomorrow's game.

What needs to happen for the Lions to pull off a shock win?

1) NZ to be off colour
2) French ref to favour Lions scrummage
3) Lions to dominate teh breakdown (again aybe with help of NH interpretations?)
4) Itoje to steal some lineout.
5) Lions to take all their chances.


Is that enough?

They need to dominate the gainline and breakdown. They also need to be on point for 80 minutes in defence.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:A few stats:

* The Lions made more clean breaks than the All Blacks in the first Test (15 to 12) despite having just 38% of overall possession.

* The Lions haven't won the second Test of a three-match series since their successful tour of South Africa in 1997.

* The All Blacks have a handy winning record at Westpac Stadium. Their last loss there was at the hands of Sir Clive Woodward's England in 2003.

http://www.espn.co.uk/rugby/preview?gameId=290602&league=268565

Should perhaps add:

Turnovers conceded - NZ 14, B&IL 22
Penalties Conceded - NZ 7, B&IL 11

Need to revers those two stats to have any hope. You would never see that with a Joe Schmidt coached side.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:The Lions have also played nicer rugby and scored nicer tries than all sides except the Blues.

Laumape's try for the 'Canes was pretty handy.

For the Lions to beat the AB's tomorrow dominance in the set pieces is a must and parity at least at the breakdown. The line out has been good but the scrum has been poor.

The backline has already proven in the first test just how dangerous they can be but I am very concerned about the 10-12 idea. Farrell and Sexton will have to put in a very solid shift tomorrow against SBW who will certainly target them.

LondonTiger wrote:433 posts so far, with less than 10% relating to tomorrow's game.

What needs to happen for the Lions to pull off a shock win?

1) NZ to be off colour
2) French ref to favour Lions scrummage
3) Lions to dominate teh breakdown (again aybe with help of NH interpretations?)
4) Itoje to steal some lineout.
5) Lions to take all their chances.


Is that enough?

Alun Wyn Jones to get locked in the bathroom

BamBam wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:433 posts so far, with less than 10% relating to tomorrow's game.

What needs to happen for the Lions to pull off a shock win?

1) NZ to be off colour
2) French ref to favour Lions scrummage
3) Lions to dominate teh breakdown (again aybe with help of NH interpretations?)
4) Itoje to steal some lineout.
5) Lions to take all their chances.


Is that enough?

Alun Wyn Jones to get locked in the bathroom

Meaning a promotion to the starting XV for Cory Hill, who puts in a man-of-the-match performance and has a bottle of champagne handed to him by Brian O'Driscoll.

eirebilly wrote:For the Lions to beat the AB's tomorrow dominance in the set pieces is a must and parity at least at the breakdown. The line out has been good but the scrum has been poor.

The backline has already proven in the first test just how dangerous they can be but I am very concerned about the 10-12 idea. Farrell and Sexton will have to put in a very solid shift tomorrow against SBW who will certainly target them.

Sexton & Farrell can tackle. Maybe SBW won't be smashed like Te'o might have, but he probably won't make breaks. OTOH he may get the odd offload off, especially as given Warburton's presence NZ may opt not to repeat the pass-inside tactic from last week, and have SBW looking to offload in the tackle to a supporting runner instead. With a specialist 12 in Laumape on the bench I expect SBW is going to be getting the ball a lot in the first 50 minutes.


Set piece wise in the lineout, the ABs have 4 jumpers (Whitelock, Retallick, Read, Kaino) vs the Lions' 2, and Whitelock & Retallick have 2-3 inches height advantage on the Lions' locks - I'd expect NZ to be targeting the Lions' lineout, especially as it's been an area of strength for them over the past year or 2

Scrumwise, last week NZ showed that just because they don't normally scrum for penalties doesn't mean they can't do it. NH teams have spent the past decade talking about dominating the NZ scrum. It very seldom happens.

Normally NZ are quite happy to kick ball to opposition back 3s, in the expectation that it will be kicked back, and offer up counterattack opportunities in broken field. This Lions back 3 is pretty handy itself on the counter (and NZ's chase line was a bit uneven & found out last week), so I'd expect NZ's kicking to be aimed more for touch to attack the lineout - the obvious Lions' counter is to take more quick throw ins.

The 10 12 idea seems like a bit of a hail Mary from Gatland at this stage. He hasnt really tried them out enough together plus T'eo was playing well. There seems to be a real reluctance to drop Farrell.

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

Sexton & Farrell can tackle. Maybe SBW won't be smashed like Te'o might have, but he probably won't make breaks. OTOH he may get the odd offload off, especially as given Warburton's presence NZ may opt not to repeat the pass-inside tactic from last week, and have SBW looking to offload in the tackle to a supporting runner instead. With a specialist 12 in Laumape on the bench I expect SBW is going to be getting the ball a lot in the first 50 minutes.

They are both solid defenders but I feel that SBW will target them relentlessly early on and that will have a tiring effect on them and may stifle their attacking play. With Te'o there, SBW was kept fairly quiet and Farrell protected.

Now I am not saying that Te'o is only worth his spot for his defensive capabilities, far from it, I think he has been excellent in attack as well and looked to link up with Davies. The 10/12 positioning was not where the Lions lost the first test. The first test was lost in the forwards with both AWJ and Kruis being totally dominated so I do not see the reason to change that the 10/12.

I would start with Itoje and Lawes. Lawes will give the AB's 9 and 10 a terrible time which is exactly the way to pressure the AB's in my mind. I would have Henderson on the bench as well as an impact sub around the 60min mark.

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

eirebilly wrote:For the Lions to beat the AB's tomorrow dominance in the set pieces is a must and parity at least at the breakdown. The line out has been good but the scrum has been poor.

The backline has already proven in the first test just how dangerous they can be but I am very concerned about the 10-12 idea. Farrell and Sexton will have to put in a very solid shift tomorrow against SBW who will certainly target them.

Sexton & Farrell can tackle. Maybe SBW won't be smashed like Te'o might have, but he probably won't make breaks. OTOH he may get the odd offload off, especially as given Warburton's presence NZ may opt not to repeat the pass-inside tactic from last week, and have SBW looking to offload in the tackle to a supporting runner instead. With a specialist 12 in Laumape on the bench I expect SBW is going to be getting the ball a lot in the first 50 minutes.


Set piece wise in the lineout, the ABs have 4 jumpers (Whitelock, Retallick, Read, Kaino) vs the Lions' 2, and Whitelock & Retallick have 2-3 inches height advantage on the Lions' locks - I'd expect NZ to be targeting the Lions' lineout, especially as it's been an area of strength for them over the past year or 2

Scrumwise, last week NZ showed that just because they don't normally scrum for penalties doesn't mean they can't do it. NH teams have spent the past decade talking about dominating the NZ scrum. It very seldom happens.

Normally NZ are quite happy to kick ball to opposition back 3s, in the expectation that it will be kicked back, and offer up counterattack opportunities in broken field. This Lions back 3 is pretty handy itself on the counter (and NZ's chase line was a bit uneven & found out last week), so I'd expect NZ's kicking to be aimed more for touch to attack the lineout - the obvious Lions' counter is to take more quick throw ins.

Pete, this past 6N Wales used all our back row as lineout options, Moriarty started because Faletau was injured, because he played so well he kept Toby out, the main options were AWJ and Tipuric, even Warburton was used IIRC a few times. The previous season Faletau was the Tipuric option he was used extensively, so tomorrow we should have 4 options as well.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:The 10 12 idea seems like a bit of a hail Mary from Gatland at this stage. He hasnt really tried them out enough together plus T'eo was playing well. There seems to be a real reluctance to drop Farrell.

Problem is if we had vintage Sexton there would be no argument, but he isn't as good as he used to be and Farrell is better than he was last Lions tour.

Still what do I know. I thought SOB was finished...

I think the Lions tactic tomorrow is going to be to kick it as high and as often as possible - for which having 3 kickers at 9, 10 and 12 helps. The Lions are not going to beat the All Blacks at the scrum or line out - if we get somewhere near parity I will be happy (taking into account Mako cannot scrummage). Alun Wyn and Maro are presumably the two strongest scrummaging second rows, hence their selection.

As for SBW you either need to close him down on the gain line before he gets going, or you try and pick off the offloads.

I hope the referee picks up on the All Blacks being offside at every ruck and maul, unlike in the Hurricanes game which was a joke. But they are up so quickly and do it so well collectively that they get away with it. Sour grapes I know, as they are much the better team (and if we were good enough to get away with it I would be happy), but it is annoying.