Lions vs Brumbies Lineup

phog

totallegend wrote: »

Should also point out that being parachuted into top-flight rugby after being in Japan for a while doesn't mean you can't hack it anymore...

You're not seriously comparing the two? One is parachuting in for ONE game while the other was bought in for the knockout games, with some lead in to the actual games.

Buer wrote: »

You know it's now only mid June, right?

I don't agree with SW's call up but not at all on the basis that I think he's going to struggle for fitness. He has always been one of the most naturally fit and sharp wingers in the world. I'd be more concerned with Christian Wade arriving in camp on Monday and starting a game on Tuesday with a 13 hour time difference after a 15 hour flight.

Do you think his training regime for boxing would be in anyway different to that of rugby, do you think a player who thinks his season is over may have gone on holiday mode?

Buer

phog wrote: »

Do you think his training regime for boxing would be in anyway different to that of rugby, do you think a player who thinks his season is over may have gone on holiday mode?

I won't bother acknowledging the repeated rhetorical questions.

I'm sure he was relaxing and on holiday mode but that doesn't exactly mean he's in the boozer every day. He's not going to lose a huge amount of fitness in a few weeks if he has been looking after himself.

Regardless, you've a big issue with his call up and that he's not fit to do the job, I don't think he'll let anyone down. Moving on.

Tim Robbins

Buer wrote: »

I won't bother acknowledging the repeated rhetorical questions.

I'm sure he was relaxing and on holiday mode but that doesn't exactly mean he's in the boozer every day. He's not going to lose a huge amount of fitness in a few weeks if he has been looking after himself.

Regardless, you've a big issue with his call up and that he's not fit to do the job, I don't think he'll let anyone down. Moving on.

I think in future the mid week games will be scrapped and it will just be a 3 test series. If the club teams have their international players withdrawn the games are not competitive enough. I got sky sports for this and there was no point. 3 trips to the pub for the tests would have been enough.

subfreq

This is the first game on tour where I think the Lions are probably going to lose. If it wasn't for the strength in the back row I would almost be certain of it.

trouttrout

The Brumbies back three is arguably a good deal better than the Lions back three too. Mogg is a class act, and I thought he would have made the Australian squad, and Speight is a brilliant strike runner. It's going to be a huge test for Hogg trying to deny them counter attacking ball

subfreq

I can't find the quote but before the Lions tour began there was mention that Deans felt Mogg was too light weight for the challenges of this test series. He must feel tomorrow is his chance to put down a marker so I can't wait to see how he goes. Toomua is also a fantastic player.

Kiwi_knock

Deans does not think Mogg is physical enough and thinks he is a weak tackler. Certainly some motivation there for Mogg to impress.

Podge_irl

Of all the potential issues one could take with Williams being drafted into the squad, I wouldn't consider his actual fitness and ability to play one of them. Yes he might lack match fitness and he hasn't played high level rugby in a while, but who cares? Its a midweek game that will be played while all attention is on the main event on Saturday. You could take issue with whether drafting in Williams is within the ethos of a Lions tour but I don't much care about his performance.

monkeybutter

.ak wrote: »

Don't think I've ever hoped to see SOB taken off at HT/50m before...

SOB is the obvious choice for the Bench given his versatility. He hasn't been made 6 because the lineout is still a mess and in fairness Croft has played well. Not sure who the backup scrumhalf will be, I think Murray has shaded it over Youngs. Roberts was nailed on to start, so his injury has left us with a concern there. There aren't going to be any surprises with the other selections. Anyone who would hope the lions should lose to teach Gatland a lesson just aint a proper fan in my books. On the size of the squad, which is better this mess or a situation where some players get little or no game time? It's hard to say. Injuries are gonna happen, calling people out is probably the best bet.

mrkillasmurph

ColmH81 wrote: »

Just read Shane Williams is starting on the wing... Is it just me or is this Lions tour becoming a joke? In my eyes The Lions was always the best players around.. No disrespect to players (clearly if they're professional then they're good players).. But I don't think Zebo, Twelvetrees etc are Lions material just yet...

Why are you so surprised? Wade is on the wing because bowe is injured, Maitland played on Saturday and cuthbert will start Saturday. Wade was available, he's resting everyone else and it's only a tour match.
Williams? North is injured/resting, zebo will be on bench on sat and Williams was in oz for punditry anyway.
12trees and Barrett? O Driscoll starting on sat, Roberts and tuilagi injured, Davies played vs nsw and probably will vs wallabies.
Hogg at 10? Sexton probably to start vs wallabies and has tight hamstring, Farrell is only other true 10 and can't be risked in case of sexton injury and will be on bench anyway. Zebo not lions material? Streets ahead of Maitland defensively and offensively, and second to none under high ball. Made a muckerey of Kearney at thomond and scored an amazing hat trick vs racing if you want to argue that one. You say that the lions were always the best players around. I think you may be confused. The game against the ACT Brumbies is NOT a test match. The first test in which "the best players around will play", will be on Saturday 22nd June against the Qantas Wallabies in Suncorp Stadium, Brisbane at 20:05 local time or 11:05 Irish time. You can watch it on Sky Sports 1 HD. Coverage starts at 10:30.

Rightwing

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I think in future the mid week games will be scrapped and it will just be a 3 test series. If the club teams have their international players withdrawn the games are not competitive enough. I got sky sports for this and there was no point. 3 trips to the pub for the tests would have been enough.

Have to agree with this, the series has been poor, maybe they got scheduling a bit wrong but overall, we've been sold a pup.

Buer

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I think in future the mid week games will be scrapped and it will just be a 3 test series. If the club teams have their international players withdrawn the games are not competitive enough. I got sky sports for this and there was no point. 3 trips to the pub for the tests would have been enough.

I don't think so. It's just the fact of the matter when touring Australia. It has always been the easiest tour for the Lions both in the test matches (15/20 won) and in the midweek games where there have been generally far softer too. Union is too far down the pecking order in Australia to be as big a challenge (AFL, league, basketball and cricket are all far more popular sports).

Come the NZ tour, it will be back to the usual with the provincial teams being populated with guys who'd be capped internationals in other countries, much more of a buzz and a real competitive nature to every game.

sydthebeat

Rightwing wrote: »

Have to agree with this, the series has been poor, maybe they got scheduling a bit wrong but overall, we've been sold a pup.

Can't se why you'd say this even before the first test?

Do you want to go back to the sixties where they lost half the games on tour?

Personally I haven't been sold anything, its cost me nothing to have this mouthwatering exhibition on every week for at least five weeks. They've so far had two good tests that they have come through well. Lets not forget that this is a strong lions squad and it is a weak time in australian rugby, relatively speaking.

I will be very surprised if theres m ore than 25 points between the teams on aggregate over the three tests.

trouttrout

Rightwing wrote: »

Have to agree with this, the series has been poor, maybe they got scheduling a bit wrong but overall, we've been sold a pup.

:rolleyes:
So you're saying the series has been poor? Even before the first test?

You'd swear any of the previous tours warmup games were in anyway better

The reds game and the Tah's game were very good

.ak

TBH I think the midweek games are crucial to the lions, regardless of the quality of opposition. You're talking about a team comprised of players from 4 nations meeting up at the end of the season. They need games to gel.

who_me

Can't see how that Lions backline is going to gel, given how it's being cobbled together at the last minute. It's like a Baa-Baa's side, but without the flair.

I'd still hope the Lions can win, but it'll be much tighter than the games thus far.

fishook

lions will win this game too, bumbies willbe good but not good enough

Digifriendly

who_me wrote: »

Can't see how that Lions backline is going to gel, given how it's being cobbled together at the last minute. It's like a Baa-Baa's side, but without the flair.

I'd still hope the Lions can win, but it'll be much tighter than the games thus far.

Wade and Williams - no flair?

Tim Robbins

Buer wrote: »

Come the NZ tour, it will be back to the usual with the provincial teams being populated with guys who'd be capped internationals in other countries, much more of a buzz and a real competitive nature to every game.

The last time they didn't even play the NZ super 15 teams. I don't think a tour against the b teams of Australia is much to write home about.

The point of rugby is that it is a team sport. Sometimes Leinster, Ulster or Munster can be better than Ireland even thou they are weaker on paper. This is because they play week in week out and have their tactics honed to suit the team's strengths. If Leinster / Munster were in a heineken cup game and had all their internationals withdrawn it would completely devalue the heineken cup. I make the same point about this Lions tour.

Digifriendly

sydthebeat wrote: »

Do you want to go back to the sixties where they lost half the games on tour?

None of the teams in the 60's ('62 S. Africa; '66 NZ and '68 S. Africa) lost half the games on tour. The worst record percentage wise was the '66 side which lost just over a quarter of the games played.

fishook

Tim Robbins wrote: »

The last time they didn't even play the NZ super 15 teams. I don't think a tour against the b teams of Australia is much to write home about.

The point of rugby is that it is a team sport. Sometimes Leinster, Ulster or Munster can be better than Ireland even thou they are weaker on paper. This is because they play week in week out and have their tactics honed to suit the team's strengths. If Leinster / Munster were in a heineken cup game and had all their internationals withdrawn it would completely devalue the heineken cup. I make the same point about this Lions tour.

Did new zealand beat them?

OnTheCouch

Buer wrote: »

I don't think so. It's just the fact of the matter when touring Australia. It has always been the easiest tour for the Lions both in the test matches (15/20 won) and in the midweek games where there have been generally far softer too. Union is too far down the pecking order in Australia to be as big a challenge (AFL, league, basketball and cricket are all far more popular sports).

Come the NZ tour, it will be back to the usual with the provincial teams being populated with guys who'd be capped internationals in other countries, much more of a buzz and a real competitive nature to every game.

Some are advocating starting up tours to Argentina again, now that the Pumas have finally entered the Rugby Championship and with the rumours that a domestic professional competition will be set up in the next few years.

Nevertheless, I feel that Buer's argument above regarding Australia would be mirrored exactly if an Argentinian tour actually happened in the future, tough test matches, but nowhere near the amount of depth required to field quality provincial teams who can really challenge the Lions. Plus huge competition from other sports.

Buer

OnTheCouch wrote: »

Nevertheless, I feel that Buer's argument above regarding Australia would be mirrored exactly if an Argentinian tour actually happened in the future, tough test matches, but nowhere near the amount of depth required to field quality provincial teams who can really challenge the Lions. Plus huge competition from other sports.

I'd absolutely love an Argentine tour if the infrastructure and systems were in place but they simply cannot host at this point in time. It will take a generation for these things to be in place. There's no professional rugby in Argentina. We saw what a second string England did to a second string national side there at the weekend. The local sides would be absolutely decimated far more than any Australian side.

In truth, this tour has not been that one sided. There have been huge scores put up in most tours. If the tour finishes with the highest score being 64 then that will be the lowest high score since 1993.

Podge_irl

The only way the Lions will ever play Argentina is in a curtain-raiser game. There isn't enough of a rugby system there and it has no history anyway. Besides, the SANZAR nations won't want the tours going from every 12 years to every 16 - they make too much money off them.

Buer

Podge_irl wrote: »

There isn't enough of a rugby system there and it has no history anyway..

Lions have toured Argentina a couple of times back in the day.

who_me

Digifriendly wrote: »

Wade and Williams - no flair?

I was talking more in terms of the gameplan - the Baa-Baas being a hastily cobbled together side who try to play with flamboyance; this Lions team (well, backline) is a hastily cobbled together side who probably won't.

OnTheCouch

Buer wrote: »

I'd absolutely love an Argentine tour if the infrastructure and systems were in place but they simply cannot host at this point in time. It will take a generation for these things to be in place. There's no professional rugby in Argentina. We saw what a second string England did to a second string national side there at the weekend. The local sides would be absolutely decimated far more than any Australian side.

True, I found it a little concerning for Argentinian rugby how easily their second team was defeated by their English equivalents. Granted, I expected England to win, simply down to the sheer amount of resources they have, plus Argentina fielded many amateur players, but thought that home advantage would make the games fairly close. But no, they were comprehensively beaten in both matches.

So yeah, it will take many years I'd imagine before the question of a possible Lions tour there can be seriously asked.

subfreq

For Australia to keep the test series competitive they have to withdraw the test players from the midweek and prep games.

I think the Lions have had the perfect prep. Backlines get to run patterns, forwards get to run patterns and combinations.

They will have had 6 games together before the test and Australia have not played together since November with many new faces and injuries to their set up!

What do people want? At this rate the Lions are dropping like flies with "easy" fixtures. I hardly see how harder games would have helped this tour.

For Paws

Point 1. How can the Australians justify withdrawing their entire squad from non-Test matches ?. Reds & 'Tahs players particularly. The match against the 'Combined' should have been scheduled for tomorrow as the last non-Test game.
there was plenty of time between the Reds v Lions & 'Tahs v Lions games and the 1st Test for at least some Oz squad players to have been available.

The result of this policy is a run of non-competitive fixtures leading up to a Test match against players without recent match experience (as a team).

Point 2. Prior to the Lions Squad announcement it night have been wise (and decent) of Gatty to ring the guys who were going to miss out, comiserate with them and also remind them that 'call-ups' are part of every tour.
How the fcuk do Visser or Ashton (for example) feel to see Shane Williams called up to play (yet another) Lions game ahead of them ?

Rotten thing to do imo.

sydthebeat

A far as I know there was a ' stands by cover' list, and players knew they were on it.

Also, how do we know sw wasn't notified to be stand by?