what is the big thing about the Lions?

JustinDee

WorldRugby99 wrote: »

whats your answer-ireland to win world cup or beating aussies with lions-please answer?

I'm not a player so how can I answer what an honour it is for them? How can you tell them what the pinnacle. You cannot.
I'm lucky that I do get to talk to players though, and they'd disagree profusely with your view on the Lions, in my experience.
As I asked, what's the point of comparison between Lions and RWC?? None. I couldn't care less if the Lions lost the series. I still disagree with your neck-up about where is lies in some irrelevant and sub-cerebral pecking order.

WorldRugby99 wrote: »

As for your quote-yes i believe the aussie backs are a class above skillwise we saw that from the reds,let alone the wallabies but if you actually looked at my other quotes i did say it wouldbe all about up front.and who wins that battle.
aussies arent in same class as south africa or all blacks and this isnt a vintage aussie side,even though as i said,backline is classier than ours-understand when i say its mediocre -let me know?!

Aussie are absolutely in the same class as South Africa. That's why they finished ahead of them in the last three championships. NZ at the moment are doing well and are ahead of everyone but minus McCaw and Carter they are beatable.

WorldRugby99

im not asking players im asking you as a fan justin-ireland winning world cup or watching a victorious lions side with sexton,BOD etc?

Australia are capable of class but not consistently.Safrica at home are a huge challenge.Any side that loses at home to scotland or samoa isnt top drawer. look at nz/SAf home record-formidable.

Eoin

OldRio wrote: »

Not changed yer spots then?
Couldn't resist could ya.

Ignore button activated.

Hate to say it, but I think he does have a point. An Irish player probably does have a better chance of beating NZ while playing for the Lions than for Ireland. I'd be thrilled if BOD would have had the opportunity to beat NZ one way or the other.

Obviously a RWC medal would be a far bigger deal than winning a Lions series, but I'm sure it's still a big honour to be selected. It gives them an opportunity to play against top quality players who they may only ever play a couple of other times against in their career, and they get to play with players who they play against every year, but they wouldn't play with at an international level.

After all this time, it's managed to retain the prestige that the Baabaas have lost (I think it used to be a bigger deal to play for the Barbarians than it is now).

daheff wrote: »

Interesting...but do France/ Italy want to play the Lions? And what about USA/Argentina (I get you are classing them as southern nation) or Samoa/Fiji?

There is a Pacific Islanders combination team that play every now and again. It's a much newer format, but it has been known to happen.

As an aside, I'd love to see someone like Sergio Parisse get a chance to play both with and against top tier players at that level.

Thud

It's an all star team (uk and Ireland) most sports have them, it's an honour to be selected and it makes for a good spectacle..enjoy it and stop yer moaning

Buer

WorldRugby99 wrote: »

Australia are capable of class but not consistently.Safrica at home are a huge challenge.Any side that loses at home to scotland or samoa isnt top drawer. look at nz/SAf home record-formidable.

Except for two of the last three Tri Nations/Rugby Championships where Aussie have beaten them in their own back yard.

LeeroyJones

As Justin aluded to, we cannot speak for the players themselves. We can only imagine what it would be like to be in their position.

My guess is that the biggest potential moment in a players life is winning the World Cup. Years of hard work paid off and immense pride for your country.
However, as an individual honour - the Lions is the highest praise you can pay a player from The UK or Ireland. It's recognition of the fact that you are, not only the best in your country, but the best of 4 rugby playing nations. It's akin to being selected on an end of year Dream Team but you actually get to tour as part of that Dream Team.

sydthebeat

The singular ' big thing' with the lions its the history.

Willie john mc bride
Mike gibson
Jpr williams
David duckham
Jeramy guscott
Ian mc geechan
Rory underwood


These players never won world cups, european cups etc and ask any of them what the pinnacle of their careers was and they will all say playing on lions tours.

Ok, in the professional era the status may not be as high, but the players still have huge respect and humility when chosen to play...just look at what both best and zebo said when they learned of their cal ups.

And as a spectator, who wouldn't want to see a dream team of the best of england, ireland scotland and wales play together against the three powerhouses of southern hemisphere rugby??

even the ideal and ethos of a lions tour in the professional era demands respect and is a symbol of what its great about the sport.

OldRio

Eoin wrote: »

Hate to say it, but I think he does have a point. An Irish player probably does have a better chance of beating NZ while playing for the Lions than for Ireland. I'd be thrilled if BOD would have had the opportunity to beat NZ one way or the other.

Not the point I was making.

LeeroyJones

daheff wrote: »

I follow rugby....but I dont get the thing about the Lions!

B-Its pretty much saying that Northern Hemisphere teams (excluding France)arent good enough on their own to compete with Southern Hemisphere teams...so they need to create a team with the best of 4 countries to challenge.

This part is rubbish. It's a limited time to get a team to combine and gel. It doesn't happen overnight. There's much more to it than just throwing the top players together etc.

In 2009 the Lions lost 2-1 to SA, yet later that year Ireland (25% of the Lions) went on to beat SA by themselves.

little173

LeeroyJones wrote: »

This part is rubbish. It's a limited time to get a team to combine and gel. It doesn't happen overnight. There's much more to it than just throwing the top players together etc.

In 2009 the Lions lost 2-1 to SA, yet later that year Ireland (25% of the Lions) went on to beat SA by themselves.

No way Ireland would have beaten SA on their own that summer - different team in the Autumn, probably the best SA pack of all time lined up there.

The Lions thing is hammed up a bit thats for sure, and SKY are doing a great job, and with HC etc there is more glory to be had at club level since professionalism. However, it is unique not just because it is a select team and its history but because its a tour and that takes what makes Rugby special in that regards, all through school/club/juniors as kids you go on these tours and its about bonding and coming together and for the Lions this is under a made up "banner" so thats why it needs to re-enforced through history and the like to get buy in and try acheive success.

themont85

JustinDee wrote: »

Its the last 'proper' rugby tour around. The Sky TV panel and British print media might go OTT on it, but the numbers who travel for it and support it is still massive.

Its test rugby to watch during the off-season so pretty good in that respect. What I do care about is that the players who take part learn so much from a tour with players of varying experience in a different environment and against SANZAR teams. O'Gara, O'Driscoll, Wallace etc all learned

Personally I don't really care about the results. In fact, I would prefer Australia to win this series as they really need it (I'm a dual Irish/Australian citizen), given the woeful state of the game there and its slide down the pecking order, registering barely a beep outside of the rugby union community despite the best efforts of Fox Sports, NewsCorp and Fairfax media.

It's News Ltd.

Fairfax and News Ltd regularly post disparaging articles on the sport. They look for a poor game with no tries and lots of scrums and go to town on it. The Waratahs have been pounded by the Sydney media to such an extent that even this year when the style and performances have perked up, crowds have only just started to turn around.

Fox are good to the sport but they are to all their properties.

Rugby's problem down there is a lack of Free to Air and the Super Rugby comp. SR is a very good standard but has so many limitations. Firstly, it is played across far too many timezones. Australian games in SA are worthless to Australian broadcasters and ruin the flow of the competition, if I'm from Sydney I can watch all of my teams games at a reasonable hour in League. It is a chore to watch rugby.

Secondly, these sides have little history, unlike AFL/League clubs. It doesn't help when the Western Force, who have had some cracking support given the player drain (Giteau, Drew Mitchell, James O'Connor, Pocock) and poor performances, decide not to bother trying to gain a famous win or performance in front of a bumper crowd. Perth is teeming with expats from rugby countries like South Africa, NZ, Britain and Ireland and has a 10 year head start on League who have screwed the pooch there since the Super League War, but they are ruining with with incompetent management.

I still expect a much better tv deal negotiated at the end of this year which should bridge the gap somewhat on League and the AFL who have now a lot more money (but broadcasters have wildly overpaid for their products). Rugby wrecked their shot at establishing themselves firmly post 2003 with poor management, its about remaining relevant now.

Not going to answer OP's points, but I find the Lions a terrific spectator tournament for many reasons but two specifically:

1. No stress. I often get so nervous during Leinster / Ireland games that it takes away from my enjoyment during the game. Other provinces similar but not as bad. Lions I just enjoy the rugby, I don't mind all that much who wins especially in the warm up games.

2. I get to see players that I watch week in and week out in completely different team set ups and combinations. It tells you a lot about their skill set and ability to see them thrown into a new outfit and I enjoy the variety of their performances.

I do disagree that it takes 4 countries in the NH to take on 1 SH team. The benefit of being 1 team is familiarity and this is why the SH's do so well against the Lions. It's very hard to drill a new team into a winning unit in a short space of time, regardless of talent levels.

TheGoldenAges

I recommend anyone to watch the "Living with the Pride" documentary on the 2009 Lions tour, one of the best sporting documentaries I've ever watched and it'll show how much commitment the players give and what it means to put on that jersey steeped in 125 years of history

Buer

TheGoldenAges wrote: »

I recommend anyone to watch the "Living with the Pride" documentary on the 2009 Lions tour, one of the best sporting documentaries I've ever watched and it'll show how much commitment the players give and what it means to put on that jersey steeped in 125 years of history

Better yet, watch the 1997 version at the outset of professionalism. The pure desire and camaraderie is something to behold. Jason Leonard's team talks, Jenkins throwing up from nerves before the games, the anguish and tears of Rob Howley when his tour is ended just before the test series and the absolute unity of the squad are all, on their own, worth watching for.

Squeeze the arms!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-hajJh8cp0

OnTheCouch

In the Anglophone countries, the Lions are undoubtedly massive. Of course if a player were to be asked would he choose a winning Lions series over a World Cup winners medal, I imagine 99 percent would say no, but one has to remember that legions of great players will never win a World Cup. We only need look at Brian O'Driscoll as a perfect and obvious example, having done no better than the quarter final stage throughout his illustrious career. But also George Smith, Gavin Hastings, Shane Williams, Jeremy Guscott, Jonah Lomu etc. So the Lions remain big business in the three traditional Southern hemisphere superpowers.

However, in the non-English speaking countries, considerably less so. The Lions' results get a mention, but generally do not generate much attention other than a mere mention or footnote at the bottom of the page. Granted, at the highest level there is only really France, Argentina and Italy at the moment in this category, but this could change.

There are quite a few non-Anglophone nations in Tier 2 and Tier 3, e.g. Georgia, Russia, Spain, Portugal, Japan, Belgium, Uruguay, Romania.

So in my opinion, depending on how much these so-called smaller nations grow in the next 20-30 years, the Lions concept may or may not flourish in the future. If the status quo remains, and elite rugby continues to be Anglophone-centric, the dominant media in these countries will ensure the Lions tours remain sacred. If other countries join the top table, I am not so sure, simply down to interest being diluted. I believe that Italy and Argentina are soon to receive equal representation in the IRB with the eight founding nations, so already those are two countries who when it comes down to it, would not have any great interest in the Lions (unless schedules are changed to include matches/tours against their national teams, but I cannot see this happening any time soon).

Swiwi

OnTheCouch wrote: »

In the Anglophone countries, the Lions are undoubtedly massive. Of course if a player were to be asked would he choose a winning Lions series over a World Cup winners medal, I imagine 99 percent would say no, but one has to remember that legions of great players will never win a World Cup. We only need look at Brian O'Driscoll as a perfect and obvious example, having done no better than the quarter final stage throughout his illustrious career. But also George Smith, Gavin Hastings, Shane Williams, Jeremy Guscott, Jonah Lomu etc. So the Lions remain big business in the three traditional Southern hemisphere superpowers.

However, in the non-English speaking countries, considerably less so. The Lions' results get a mention, but generally do not generate much attention other than a mere mention or footnote at the bottom of the page. Granted, at the highest level there is only really France, Argentina and Italy at the moment in this category, but this could change.

There are quite a few non-Anglophone nations in Tier 2 and Tier 3, e.g. Georgia, Russia, Spain, Portugal, Japan, Belgium, Uruguay, Romania.

So in my opinion, depending on how much these so-called smaller nations grow in the next 20-30 years, the Lions concept may or may not flourish in the future. If the status quo remains, and elite rugby continues to be Anglophone-centric, the dominant media in these countries will ensure the Lions tours remain sacred. If other countries join the top table, I am not so sure, simply down to interest being diluted. I believe that Italy and Argentina are soon to receive equal representation in the IRB with the eight founding nations, so already those are two countries who when it comes down to it, would not have any great interest in the Lions (unless schedules are changed to include matches/tours against their national teams, but I cannot see this happening any time soon).

Here it is about Italy & Argentina. How Canada & Japan have 1 vote each, and the Pacific Islands get rolled into 1 can only be pure politics.

http://www.espn.co.uk/scrum/rugby/story/181331.html

themont85

OnTheCouch wrote: »

In the Anglophone countries, the Lions are undoubtedly massive. Of course if a player were to be asked would he choose a winning Lions series over a World Cup winners medal, I imagine 99 percent would say no, but one has to remember that legions of great players will never win a World Cup. We only need look at Brian O'Driscoll as a perfect and obvious example, having done no better than the quarter final stage throughout his illustrious career. But also George Smith, Gavin Hastings, Shane Williams, Jeremy Guscott, Jonah Lomu etc. So the Lions remain big business in the three traditional Southern hemisphere superpowers.

However, in the non-English speaking countries, considerably less so. The Lions' results get a mention, but generally do not generate much attention other than a mere mention or footnote at the bottom of the page. Granted, at the highest level there is only really France, Argentina and Italy at the moment in this category, but this could change.

There are quite a few non-Anglophone nations in Tier 2 and Tier 3, e.g. Georgia, Russia, Spain, Portugal, Japan, Belgium, Uruguay, Romania.

So in my opinion, depending on how much these so-called smaller nations grow in the next 20-30 years, the Lions concept may or may not flourish in the future. If the status quo remains, and elite rugby continues to be Anglophone-centric, the dominant media in these countries will ensure the Lions tours remain sacred. If other countries join the top table, I am not so sure, simply down to interest being diluted. I believe that Italy and Argentina are soon to receive equal representation in the IRB with the eight founding nations, so already those are two countries who when it comes down to it, would not have any great interest in the Lions (unless schedules are changed to include matches/tours against their national teams, but I cannot see this happening any time soon).

The Lions will continue to flourish. International rugby is the financial engine room of world rugby and the Lions is like that on steroids for a flickering period. Its commercial appeal is enormous. It doesn't matter if those countries get bigger and better (which hopefully they will), the Lions will go on.

I expect after the 2017 accord ends that the Home Unions will start getting a lot more money. Just for B teams; 20k in Newcastle (rugby is barely played there), 30k in Perth, 50k in Brisbane and at least 200k (probably closer to 300k) to come on the Austrlian eastern seaboard for the next 6 games. Thousands travelling into Australia and bouncing from city to city.

City councils and countries are going to have to start putting bids in for it as it is invaluable for tourism.

OnTheCouch

Swiwi wrote: »

Here it is about Italy & Argentina. How Canada & Japan have 1 vote each, and the Pacific Islands get rolled into 1 can only be pure politics.

http://www.espn.co.uk/scrum/rugby/story/181331.html

Thanks, yeah this is especially true about the Pacific Islands, where Samoa are curently seventh in the world and possibly being as strong as they have been for many years. Comfortably beat both Wales and Scotland in the past year for instance.

little173

themont85 wrote: »

The Lions will continue to flourish. International rugby is the financial engine room of world rugby and the Lions is like that on steroids for a flickering period. Its commercial appeal is enormous. It doesn't matter if those countries get bigger and better (which hopefully they will), the Lions will go on.

I expect after the 2017 accord ends that the Home Unions will start getting a lot more money. Just for B teams; 20k in Newcastle (rugby is barely played there), 30k in Perth, 50k in Brisbane and at least 200k (probably closer to 300k) to come on the Austrlian eastern seaboard for the next 6 games. Thousands travelling into Australia and bouncing from city to city.

City councils and countries are going to have to start putting bids in for it as it is invaluable for tourism.

Yes good point - it is like F1 now where states bid and bend over backwards to get the races beacuse of the revenue it brings, the Lions are the big money spinner - its big business. Imagine what it would do to Argentinian tourism.

Noffles

The Lions tour is class, buy a new jersey every four years for it, well since I could afford one..

the build up is superb and no matter where they go NZ, SA or AUS... it's heavily followed..

Just glad there's no SANZAR version that does the same!

patmac

I like the Lions and have fond memories of previous tours, but does it do the national and provincial teams any good? It extends the season for players that basically could do with a rest and be fresh for the coming season. I know we have post season tours but the intensity and commitment levels with the Lions would be way higher. Also I was disappointed with Sean O'Brien who missed the pro12 final in order to save himself for the Lions and I was glad he didn't make the test team. Even though I will be cheering them on on Saturday I would take an Irish win over Italy any day of the week than a Lions win.

Podge_irl

It was Joe's call not to play SOB in the final and I have no idea why you'd be glad he didn't make the team.

seanm92

patmac wrote: »

I like the Lions and have fond memories of previous tours, but does it do the national and provincial teams any good? It extends the season for players that basically could do with a rest and be fresh for the coming season. I know we have post season tours but the intensity and commitment levels with the Lions would be way higher. Also I was disappointed with Sean O'Brien who missed the pro12 final in order to save himself for the Lions and I was glad he didn't make the test team. Even though I will be cheering them on on Saturday I would take an Irish win over Italy any day of the week than a Lions win.

What are you on about? If O'Brien was fit enough he would have played the Rabo final, end of story, why would Schmidt rest him for the benefit of the Lions? also, as highlighted by the above poster, what an idiotic comment

Podge_irl

seanm92 wrote: »

What are you on about? If O'Brien was fit enough he would have played the Rabo final, end of story, why would Schmidt rest him for the benefit of the Lions? also, as highlighted by the above poster, what an idiotic comment

Schmidt did actually say if there was no Lions tour he might have started SOB i.e. he could play but wasn't 100% fit.

.ak

Still Schmidt's call at the end of the day.

Phonehead

I like the Lions, I like the history and I'd hate to see it gone from the rugby calendar. However this tour in particular really hasn't captured the imagination and a large part is down to Australia and the fact that Union doesn't register in the Public minds as important (something the Lions tour thrives on) The Players, they are all so well handled now that we don't get much from them so especially in Australia where there is no home media throwing battle cries this tour just seems to be spluttering along to the beat of annoying British & Irish media championing their own players for selection.

bamboozle

i love sport and my two favourite sporting events are the lions tour and the ryder cup, selection for these events are the ultimate achievement for well paid sportsmen whose ambition to participate is not driven by money but by the unique history of the event and the recognition that goes with Lions selection.

i can pretty confidently say that at the start of this season one of the primary goals for all internationals in the 4 countries was selection for the lions tour. whatever about suggestions above with SOB holding himself back for Lions duty during the Rabo final, both BOD and POC carefully managed their injuries to ensure they gave their bodies the best chance of being ready for oz.

i'd love to know what BOD or POC's honest answer to the following question would be 'prioritise the following, captaining ireland to win a grandslam, captaining ireland to win the world cup, captain your province to win the hc, captain the lions in a test series win in NZ'

in saying all this, the selection of shane williams really did an injustice to the tour and was a slap in the face to the likes of mcfadden, trimble, visser, ashton etc

Swiwi.

What is rare is precious, and rare a Lions tour is, precious therefore it is.

I probably slightly prefer the RWC, but a Lions tour is essential rugby viewing, and it strikes me to the core that non-Anglophone countries do not have remotely the same enthusiasm for it as the home counties and the colonials. It also provides a rare occasion where Celtic and Anglosaxon have a common sense of purpose.

patmac

Podge_irl wrote: »

Schmidt did actually say if there was no Lions tour he might have started SOB i.e. he could play but wasn't 100% fit.

Which is wrong IMO as your province and your country pay your wages. Having said that O'Brien was in a difficult situation, obviously not 100% fit and a once in a lifetime chance to join the Lions this is why he's probably not being picked for the weekend.

Conchir

The thing I love about the Lions is the fact that this group of players, who spend 4 years trying to beat the crap out of each other, all of a sudden gel to form one single team. It's great as a supporter to be able to really get behind all those other great players that you can't support usually. It's unique.

The supporters make it really special. To go support a Lions tour is definitely a dream of mine, as mixing with all the other fans looks great.