No Brian O'Driscoll for the Lions vs Australia 3rd Test!...

[Not Andy Naylor]

Mihir Bose on the Today programme has just compared it to Alf Ramsey dropping Jimmy Greaves for the World Cup final. Except that he didn't. Greaves didn't play in the QF or SF either.

 

[somerset]

The great 74 lions team had only 6 Welshmen in it - despite Wales being easily the best home nation. Everyone contributed in that team because management recognised certain players for certain positions. Uttley and Milliken did just as much as Edwards and Bennett.

It just doesn't sit right with me to have so many Welshmen in the team...

Correct, even during the very controversial Woodward tour to NZ in 2005, a tour that I spent 7 grand watching us get smashed, he only selected 7, 6 and 5 Englishmen respectively, to start the three tests, and the Welsh supporters on our tour were moaning bitterly about that....... ten is an outrage.

 

[somerset]

There were 11 Enlgishmen against New Zealand 20 years ago. If they 10 Englishmen no-one would have a problem

This is true, but that was more down to injuries/fitness than blatant favouritism,.... the head coach on that tour was Scottish, the captain was Scottish,...

 

[LamieRobertson]

Correct, even during the very controversial Woodward tour to NZ in 2005, a tour that I spent 7 grand watching us get smashed, he only selected 7, 6 and 5 Englishmen respectively, to start the three tests, and the Welsh supporters on our tour were moaning bitterly about that....... ten is an outrage.

7k? ouch!

 

[somerset]

Gullivers are good but pricey,... mind you 5 days in Fiji before, and 5 days in Sydney after didn't help.

 

[LamieRobertson]

Gullivers are good but pricey,... mind you 5 days in Fiji before, and 5 days in Sydney after didn't help.

lol..sounds a bit better with those 10 days

 

[Brovion]

Correct, even during the very controversial Woodward tour to NZ in 2005, a tour that I spent 7 grand watching us get smashed, he only selected 7, 6 and 5 Englishmen respectively, to start the three tests, and the Welsh supporters on our tour were moaning bitterly about that....... ten is an outrage.

Here's a slightly off-topic question (and as you spent that much on a Lions tour your opinion counts more than most), at the end of that tour when we'd got absolutely thrashed there was a lot of talk that the Lions couldn't survive in the professional era and that the essentially scratch nature of the team (not helped by the shortened tours giving the players less time to get to know each other) meant that they could never compete with tighter national squads. Especially SH squads.

So what do you consider the greater threat to Lions tours? Being uncompetitive or picking teams that are against the supposed ethos of the Lions such as the Greater Wales team that's playing tomorrow? Obviously I'd say the former. At least we're still taking about it this time rather than just hoping the tour would end!

 

[Pavilionaire]

Before this tour the thought of turning down the chance to play for the Lions was unthinkable. However, if the players feel the Head Coach is going to favour the players of one nation over the others then it will weaken the ethos of the Lions and cause inevitable divisions in the squad.

I can see how the likes of Tuilagi, Croft, Hogg, Maitland and Connor Murray might have looked at the situation and thought they'd be better off resting up.

 

[Baron Pepperpot]

I'm just so pleased to see so many rugger fans on NSC. Aviva Premiership fixtures out today. Note BT sport is televising half the games, and if you have BT broadband it's free. Good times.

Go the Quins !

 

[sten_super]

Before this tour the thought of turning down the chance to play for the Lions was unthinkable. However, if the players feel the Head Coach is going to favour the players of one nation over the others then it will weaken the ethos of the Lions and cause inevitable divisions in the squad.

I can see how the likes of Tuilagi, Croft, Hogg, Maitland and Connor Murray might have looked at the situation and thought they'd be better off resting up.

I'm sorry but I really do think that you are putting a ridiculous spin on this. It was very obvious when the squad was announced that Hogg, Maitland and Murray were going as reserves. Tuilagi was (if everyone was fit) going to struggle to get a game - you can make an argument for playing him in the first two Tests at inside centre (although you are then faced with the prospect of not playing BOD in any of the Tests, as Davies was on fire in the warm up games) but he was clearly behind Roberts. Croft played one Test and didn't exactly cover himself in glory - realistically the type of rugby they are playing he's not a good fit for this team, and he's another that is far from a shoe-in for any first combined first XV.

That's without even considering that this is ONE Lions tour, with ONE coach (who is never likely to coach them again); how would that influence people's long term views of the Lions? It's not as if partisanship is a long-term feature, according to all those so lambasting Gatland for daring to pick players from the country he coaches.

 

[Pavilionaire]

I don't think it's a ridiculous spin at all. I think it's now more likely that likely fringe players will give it a miss in future, maybe coming up with a mystery injury come selection time. Tom Croft has a very realistic chance of winning the Heineken Cup with Leicester and doing well in the World Cup with England - we've been in 2 of the last 3 finals.

Playing for the Lions only weakens his chances of achieving these goals as his body will get less rest. Leicester pay him well and will clearly be keen for him to stay at home if there's any chance of this happening.

Gatland himself said the last selection meeting had been heated and I'm not surprised.

All of the above has happened in football with the England team and I don't see any fundamental difference between that and the Lions. To work, that unique Lions X Factor has to be there, and by dropping O'Driscoll out of the squad altogether and starting 10 Welshmen I think the essence of the Lions has gone.

 

[Fitzcarraldo]

Can I ask who in the Northern hemisphere plays this beautiful running rugby. In the 6 Nations , Italy did against France and that was about it. Ireland didn't and were bloody awful. England only scored one try after the first game and played the same rugby style as Wales but less well.

Toulon won Heineken Cup playing 'worse' rugby.
In the Premiership Gloucester and Exeter were the only clubs who played with some panache, and neither made the play-offs

Few teams play it, but there are players in the Lions squad capable of playing it. Gatland hasn't picked them.

 

[sten_super]

I don't think it's a ridiculous spin at all. I think it's now more likely that likely fringe players will give it a miss in future, maybe coming up with a mystery injury come selection time. Tom Croft has a very realistic chance of winning the Heineken Cup with Leicester and doing well in the World Cup with England - we've been in 2 of the last 3 finals.

Playing for the Lions only weakens his chances of achieving these goals as his body will get less rest. Leicester pay him well and will clearly be keen for him to stay at home if there's any chance of this happening.

Gatland himself said the last selection meeting had been heated and I'm not surprised.

All of the above has happened in football with the England team and I don't see any fundamental difference between that and the Lions. To work, that unique Lions X Factor has to be there, and by dropping O'Driscoll out of the squad altogether and starting 10 Welshmen I think the essence of the Lions has gone.

I think you've got two different points and you've implied some link between them where I don't think there is one. There have always been fringe and reserve players for the lions; that's part of the reason they play midweek games. I can accept that the increasing personal rewards available in domestic and international rugby might diminish some players desire to play for the Lions.

I can also see that some feel that Gatland has done things not really in the spirit of the Lions. However as I said he's not going to be coach again - and there's no guarantee what the next guy will be like. Anyone trying to link Gatland's behaviour this tour to the new coaches in four years is going to be onto a losing bet. And that's without considering the question of whether these elite rugby players would rather go on a 'spirited' tour and lose (as they have for the past few tours) or a 'serious' tour and win (as they may just do on Saturday).

 

[nwgull]

I don't think it's a ridiculous spin at all. I think it's now more likely that likely fringe players will give it a miss in future, maybe coming up with a mystery injury come selection time. Tom Croft has a very realistic chance of winning the Heineken Cup with Leicester and doing well in the World Cup with England - we've been in 2 of the last 3 finals.

Playing for the Lions only weakens his chances of achieving these goals as his body will get less rest. Leicester pay him well and will clearly be keen for him to stay at home if there's any chance of this happening.

Gatland himself said the last selection meeting had been heated and I'm not surprised.

All of the above has happened in football with the England team and I don't see any fundamental difference between that and the Lions. To work, that unique Lions X Factor has to be there, and by dropping O'Driscoll out of the squad altogether and starting 10 Welshmen I think the essence of the Lions has gone.

No chance. Being selected for the Lions is the highest level a rugby player can achieve; no player is ever going to turn down a place on the touring squad.

Rugby isn't like football. It's true that the Heineken cup is a high level of club rugby, but international rugby is what all players aspire to. Another major difference to football is that the money at international level is greater in rugby.

 

[keaton]

I really feel for the knobbers not enjoying this

 

[sten_super]

I'm three pints to the good, so apologies for being blunt, but I hope those of you criticising Gatland feel suitably ridiculous having seen the performance (including 12 man line out) and player reaction to the victory.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

I'm three pints to the good, so apologies for being blunt, but I hope those of you criticising Gatland feel suitably ridiculous having seen the performance (including 12 man line out) and player reaction to the victory.

Why ? What has changed ? The Lions won. The criticism of Gatland was for the spirit of the Lions - not the fact that the team could not win. I think you may have missed the point slightly.

 

[One Love]

The Lions won.

You must be gutted

 

[somerset]

Why ? What has changed ? The Lions won. The criticism of Gatland was for the spirit of the Lions - not the fact that the team could not win. I think you may have missed the point slightly.

Exactly, even the much criticised Woodward only used seven of his favoured Englishmen,....maintain the spirit of the Lions and you maintain a perfect old school antidote to the rampant professionalism and cynicism of the world game.

 

[Pavilionaire]

I'm glad that an Englishman and an Irishman scored tries for the Lions, it provides a bit of counter-balance to what was a Welsh- inspired victory. Well done to Gatland too. All in all, a very enjoyable series.