Chiefs v Lions match thread

Former Former

A lot of guys at least made a case for themselves for the second test.

CurryFlavoured

Buer wrote: »

It's not the Barbarians. They've a 3 test match series starting in 4 days in which some of these guys might have to play. Job done, get off the field.

He was talking about Biggar about 5 mins earlier. There was about a 3 man overlap out wide but he kicked it to the Chiefs fullback.

Buer

Game sort of fizzled out. Even before Nowell's second try, you got the impression that the Chiefs had lost the stomach for the fight and it was all a little flat.

Forwards put down the ground work for the game in the first 50 minutes. They were shagged after that though. Henderson and Stander had bit opening halves but relatively quiet after that. Doubt they had much left in the legs.

Credit to guys like Cole, Haskell and Tipuric. Probably bottom of the pecking order but they're the guys who were really emptying the tank in the closing stages and fighting for every ball.

The 23 jersey is now the only real mystery ahead of the test, I think.

CurryFlavoured

Williams, Payne, Nowell and Henderson did their chances no harm. The team for Saturday was set before today, but going forward they could sneak in.

Pretty disappointed with Henshaw, he just hasn't got going at all.

laurie88

Buer wrote: »

Game sort of fizzled out. Even before Nowell's second try, you got the impression that the Chiefs had lost the stomach for the fight and it was all a little flat.

Forwards put down the ground work for the game in the first 50 minutes. They were shagged after that though. Henderson and Stander had bit opening halves but relatively quiet after that. Doubt they had much left in the legs.

Credit to guys like Cole, Haskell and Tipuric. Probably bottom of the pecking order but they're the guys who were really emptying the tank in the closing stages and fighting for every ball.

The 23 jersey is now the only real mystery ahead of the test, I think.

It was a great show by the Lions, But they looked liked they were running on empty again in the closing against the mid week specials

laurie88

CurryFlavoured wrote: »

Williams, Payne, Nowell and Henderson did their chances no harm. The team for Saturday was set before today, but going forward they could sneak in.

Pretty disappointed with Henshaw, he just hasn't got going at all.

unlike those mentioned, Henshaw didn't inject himself into key attacks when he should've.

razorblunt

Buer wrote: »

Game sort of fizzled out. Even before Nowell's second try, you got the impression that the Chiefs had lost the stomach for the fight and it was all a little flat.

Forwards put down the ground work for the game in the first 50 minutes. They were shagged after that though. Henderson and Stander had bit opening halves but relatively quiet after that. Doubt they had much left in the legs.

Credit to guys like Cole, Haskell and Tipuric. Probably bottom of the pecking order but they're the guys who were really emptying the tank in the closing stages and fighting for every ball.

The 23 jersey is now the only real mystery ahead of the test, I think.

Yep, in fairness to Haskell, he went well today, he's been pretty anonymous so far but he's taking one for the team right now and credit where it's due.

Tipuric I feel might be most hard done by out of all of them, it should really be between him and SOB for the 7 jersey. Warburton shouldn't event be factored in.

Buer

Big impact is that this will galvanise the squad. Not many of these guys are going to be involved next week but they'll get a feel good factor and momentum into the camp. It's going to be of benefit when the midweek lads are going into training on Thursday with a spring in their step, wanting to lift the test players. Big benefit to them.

So, in conclusion, 3-0 NZ.

Buer

laurie88 wrote: »

unlike those mentioned, Henshaw didn't inject himself into key attacks when he should've.

Well, he did try once and had a very likely try but Seymour ran straight across him, ignoring his line for a pass and then f*cked it at Payne's knees.

But, no, not a particularly impressive showing from him. Was average in a back line where others put their hands up.

Clegg

Thought Henshaw was quite decent tbh. Too late for the first test now though. He needed that sort of game against the Blues.

.ak

Some cracking tries there, especially Nowell's 2nd. That'll be doing the rounds now.

Very disappointed Russell didn't get on. Couldn't understand that at all, poor form.

Buer

Well, after all the kerfuffle 5 of the 6 call ups made no appearance and, to my mind, are still not Lions.

Buer

.ak wrote: »

Some cracking tries there, especially Nowell's 2nd. That'll be doing the rounds now.

Very disappointed Russell didn't get on. Couldn't understand that at all, poor form.

They're there as cover, nothing more. If there were no injury concerns, they didn't feature. I wouldn't be surprised if they're released now.

Former Former

I would have liked G Davies to come in because he's just better than Laidlaw, but in general, I'm glad the emergency cover was treated as such.

BoardsMember

Buer wrote: »

They're there as cover, nothing more. If there were no injury concerns, they didn't feature. I wouldn't be surprised if they're released now.

Why would they be released now when there is one more midweek game? Can't see how it would make sense to release them until at least after that, otherwise you are again in a situation that, by definition, some players involved in the match day 23 midweek are also involved in the following test. And that's without any injuries.

irishbucsfan

BoardsMember wrote: »

Why would they be released now when there is one more midweek game?

Because Wales and Scotland are still touring I guess?

They'll be need next week for sure

Buer

BoardsMember wrote: »

Why would they be released now when there is one more midweek game? Can't see how it would make sense to release them until at least after that, otherwise you are again in a situation that, by definition, some players involved in the match day 23 midweek are also involved in the following test. And that's without any injuries.

I would imagine that Gatland will be happier to give a little bit of game time to some of his subs come next week. The call ups were with this game in mind.

Come next week, we could have guys like Warburton, Webb and Owens who have had very little game time in the previous two weeks and could do with 20 minutes against the Hurricanes.

If you look at the 2013 tour, they went with the ridiculous call ups in the final game before the tests (Wade, Shane Williams, Billy Twelvetrees) but then, for the last midweek game which was between the first and second test, they started 5 of the 8 subs from the first test. The only guys who didn't start that game were Vunipola, Parling and Youngs which was because they were pencilled in to start the second test against Australia (and Youngs still benched against the Rebels).

shuffol

Henshaw is a fantastic competitor but his rugby IQ has shown to be lacking on this tour, a bit like Madigan tbh.

.ak

CurryFlavoured wrote: »

Payne is a very underrated player, big fan. Hope he's not hurt going off there.

Any update on him? Presume it was HIA?

Today he showed why he's better suited to 13 than 15 for me. Looks great at 15 for Ulster but I think he struggles there against tougher oppo.

.ak

Buer wrote: »

They're there as cover, nothing more. If there were no injury concerns, they didn't feature. I wouldn't be surprised if they're released now.

I think that's silly. There's going to be injuries, it's rugby. Russell specifically needs to be involved. Sexton/Farrell are so important, and injury to either of them means biggar on the bench. If I was coach I would've used that opportunity to see what Russell could do.

thomond2006

.ak wrote: »

I think that's silly. There's going to be injuries, it's rugby. Russell specifically needs to be involved. Sexton/Farrell are so important, and injury to either of them means biggar on the bench. If I was coach I would've used that opportunity to see what Russell could do.

Perhaps this was the compromise PR wise to make these call-ups.

irishbucsfan

Makes complete sense not to take time to see what Russell could do. He's arrived a couple of days before the match. Why would you spend time working with him intensively when you're staring down the barrel of the biggest game of your coaching career a couple of days later? I'd imagine none of the guys who were brought in had much idea of anything the Lions are going to try to do. I'd be surprised if they spent much time on the Chiefs game at all.

The chances that he'll be needed in a test match are very small. It'd require an injury to both Sexton and Farrell to just get him into the 23 and then another to Biggar during a match to get him onto the pitch. It's not exactly a big risk to take.

Buer

.ak wrote: »

I think that's silly. There's going to be injuries, it's rugby. Russell specifically needs to be involved. Sexton/Farrell are so important, and injury to either of them means biggar on the bench. If I was coach I would've used that opportunity to see what Russell could do.

There will need to be two injuries for Finn Russell to even make the bench and I genuinely think there's a chance that Gatland would get on the phone to George Ford before he'd pick Russell.

These lads weren't called up as cover for the test team. They were called up so potential test players wouldn't be at risk of being called into action 4 days out from the first test. They're seat fillers for a night. There's zero consideration of them being involved in a test match. Russell's the biggest name of those called up but I don't think he's being treated any differently and the lack of a any game time this morning seemed to confirm that.

I don't think they'll be released now but I do think they'll be released after the Hurricanes game. They've no business hanging around the squad after that.

BoardsMember

Buer wrote: »

I would imagine that Gatland will be happier to give a little bit of game time to some of his subs come next week. The call ups were with this game in mind.

Come next week, we could have guys like Warburton, Webb and Owens who have had very little game time in the previous two weeks and could do with 20 minutes against the Hurricanes.

If you look at the 2013 tour, they went with the ridiculous call ups in the final game before the tests (Wade, Shane Williams, Billy Twelvetrees) but then, for the last midweek game which was between the first and second test, they started 5 of the 8 subs from the first test. The only guys who didn't start that game were Vunipola, Parling and Youngs which was because they were pencilled in to start the second test against Australia (and Youngs still benched against the Rebels).

Thanks for the explanation. Makes sense re those who might need game time, but still - game time 4 days before playing the all blacks? I'm not sure these kinds of things can be squeezed in like that. One weeks rest is surely a minimum at this level.

This game reinforced my opinion that Heaslip is a big loss to the tour. He's got the best hands of any of the backrows in contention for the Lions and Tipurics steal and release for Nowell's try showed how damaging the Lions can be when the ball is moved wide with pace and accuracy.

leakyboots

Deleted User wrote: »

This game reinforced my opinion that Heaslip is a big loss to the tour. He's got the best hands of any of the backrows in contention for the Lions and Tipurics steal and release for Nowell's try showed how damaging the Lions can be when the ball is moved wide with pace and accuracy.

Nah, I don't think he's missed at all.

Vunipola is definitely the big loss, was guaranteed to cause havoc.

But Faletau, SOB and POM (he's shown great handling skills actually) are going well.

Buer

Strangely enough, if Heaslip had been fit, I think Stander would be in the 23 on Saturday.

awec

Deleted User wrote: »

This game reinforced my opinion that Heaslip is a big loss to the tour. He's got the best hands of any of the backrows in contention for the Lions and Tipurics steal and release for Nowell's try showed how damaging the Lions can be when the ball is moved wide with pace and accuracy.

I think you spelled Vunipola wrong.

awec

awec wrote: »

I think you spelled Vunipola wrong.

Absolutely, he would be nailed on starter given Moriarty's injury and Stander / Warbs failing to find any form.

But in a chopping and changing lineup that is showing unwillingness to play the ball through the hands a versatile workhorse like Heaslip would be massive.

leakyboots

You don't think Stander has found any form? I think you're letting your own bias get in the way there

Squidgy Black

leakyboots wrote: »

You don't think Stander has found any form? I think you're letting your own bias get in the way there

On this tour? No he hasn't found any form. He's been very much at the standard of a midweek player.

thomond2006

If there was more money in rugby then higher levels of analysis would be readily available. Cian Fahey watches every single play in the NFL and charts what happens (subjectively) and designs his own advanced statistics. He's able to separate the role/performance of each player in an outcome. He can do this because he can make a living from it. You couldn't do that in rugby.

leakyboots

leakyboots wrote: »

You don't think Stander has found any form? I think you're letting your own bias get in the way there

Bias against Stander??? If I had any bias about an Irish player it would be the other way around.

Stander has had a poor tour. He looks tired tbh, no shame in admitting that.

leakyboots

Nah, he hasn't been poor, sorry. Henshaw, he's been poor. Seymour, he's been poor. Nowell, until today, was poor.

Stander hasn't been at his personal best, clearly carrying an injury/tired like you said, but in spite of that he's still not far off being part of the test 23 at all for me. Top carrier, turning over opposition ball, showing leadership on the pitch, one of the few to bag a try - he's had a good tour. Dunno how people can say he's had 'a poor tour'

irishbucsfan

Stander has had a poor tour for me. It started very poor and he had his best performance in the first half today before fading and going back to how he was. Some of his carrying has been atrociously frustrating. If he'd had a good tour he wouldn't have been playing today.

Henshaw has had a mixed bag. Probably our best defensive back and by quite a distance, except for maybe Payne, but just doesn't make things happen going forward. Great player to have but needs that extra ability to make something happen for others.

Buer

leakyboots wrote: »

Nah, he hasn't been poor, sorry. Henshaw, he's been poor. Seymour, he's been poor. Nowell, until today, was poor.

Stander hasn't been at his personal best, clearly carrying an injury/tired like you said, but in spite of that he's still not far off being part of the test 23 at all for me. Top carrier, turning over opposition ball, showing leadership on the pitch, one of the few to bag a try - he's had a good tour. Dunno how people can say he's had 'a poor tour'

It really depends on what's your metric and what his form is relative to. I think he has gone ok. Had some good moments, worked his socks off but lacked the punch we've seen in the past. If this was an Irish tour we'd be saying he has had a grand tour and would be among the more prominent performers.

I would imagine that he is fairly disappointed with his performances to date, though. I don't think I'd be wrong in saying most of us had him pencilled in to be the test 6 a while back. He's unlikely to be in the test 23 now for the opener and can't have any complaints.

It's entirely subjective and, in a Lions context, not being in the test 23 doesn't mean a poor tour. However, going out there as a favourite for the test side and not making the 23 could suggest that just like Henshaw will be disappointed with his tour.

molloyjh

I know I'm not going to make many friends saying it but I think CJ is very one dimensional. He's very good at what he does but against the best sides he can be bottled up. Leinster have done that to him a few times in the league and it's happened at Test level too. He carries straight into contact so if you meet him at the gain line (or behind it) with enough physicality you can take him out of the game. He doesn't offer the variety to his game that he needs. And he needs to find that soon because I genuinely think he's in danger of being found out to a degree. His defensive game is very good but for me he's behind both POM and Heaslip for Ireland, nevermind the Lions.

crisco10

molloyjh wrote: »

I know I'm not going to make many friends saying it but I think CJ is very one dimensional. He's very good at what he does but against the best sides he can be bottled up. Leinster have done that to him a few times in the league and it's happened at Test level too. He carries straight into contact so if you meet him at the gain line (or behind it) with enough physicality you can take him out of the game. He doesn't offer the variety to his game that he needs. And he needs to find that soon because I genuinely think he's in danger of being found out to a degree. His defensive game is very good but for me he's behind both POM and Heaslip for Ireland, nevermind the Lions.

I actually agree, his carrying is unreal at times, but a bit like SOB in 2011, he can fall into the trap of doing it over and over again with diminishing effect.

crisco10

crisco10 wrote: »

I actually agree, his carrying is unreal at times, but a bit like SOB in 2011, he can fall into the trap of doing it over and over again with diminishing effect.

Hopefully Stander can develop his game like Seanie has. Even with Gatlands huge blindspot for Warburton there is a decent chance O'Brien will start at the weekend at 7 and developing and adapting his game is what has him a Lions test starter for a second tour.

It will be a real test of character for Stander if he can get out of his comfort zone and it will make him a more complete no.8 in the mold of Heaslip imo.

Interestingly Conan is a player that hasn't hit the same heights yet but already has a very rounded game.

Former Former

Ah, Stander has had a very disappointing tour. Most people would have had him down as a likely test player, and once Vunipola dropped out the omens were very good for him. He looked knackered against Scarlets so maybe he's just had a long season. It's a shame.

razorblunt

I don't think Stander has recovered from that ankle injury in the Pro 12 semi final. It's also been a very long season for him. Definitely starting to show in the legs.

Haskell is looking leggy too, he waddles around rather than running, but he's been off form since February really.

molloyjh

Former Former wrote: »

Ah, Stander has had a very disappointing tour. Most people would have had him down as a likely test player, and once Vunipola dropped out the omens were very good for him. He looked knackered against Scarlets so maybe he's just had a long season. It's a shame.

For the record this is something I've been saying for a few months now. I just haven't had the courage to say it online until now.....

awec

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Stander has had a poor tour for me. It started very poor and he had his best performance in the first half today before fading and going back to how he was. Some of his carrying has been atrociously frustrating. If he'd had a good tour he wouldn't have been playing today.

Henshaw has had a mixed bag. Probably our best defensive back and by quite a distance, except for maybe Payne, but just doesn't make things happen going forward. Great player to have but needs that extra ability to make something happen for others.

Henshaw has been poor, let's stop fannying about.

For all this talk of Stander being a bit one dimensional (which he is), there seems to be a reluctance to say the same for Henshaw (and it is equally true for him as well) who has been even worse than Stander.

And the thing about Henshaw is he doesn't really do much better for Ireland either. It's not as if you can say that his boshing is a result of Gatland, he is just as bad in green. But for whatever reason he escapes criticism and has excuses made while Stander's limitations are highlighted front and centre.

People comparing Stander to Heaslip, what a waste of time. Completely different players. This is like comparing Heaslip to Vunipola, a waste of time as they are entirely different.

kilns

It has to be said, Stander, Henshaw and Payne have had relatively poor tours from what Irish supporters would expect from them.  Yes Henshaw has been one dimensional in attack, I guess it is a pity for him that he didnt get the opportunity to play with the test starters, I think he could have easily been as impressive as Teo or Davies as there is not much between them all.
Stander and Payne started off very poorly and have improved, Stander too is becoming very one dimensional and is beginning to be found out a little, he now needs to add to his game like SOB has.  Payne has been solid in the last few games but just hasnt brought that X factor that makes him stand out (albeit no one else has either)

AbusesToilets

molloyjh wrote: »

I know I'm not going to make many friends saying it but I think CJ is very one dimensional. He's very good at what he does but against the best sides he can be bottled up. Leinster have done that to him a few times in the league and it's happened at Test level too. He carries straight into contact so if you meet him at the gain line (or behind it) with enough physicality you can take him out of the game. He doesn't offer the variety to his game that he needs. And he needs to find that soon because I genuinely think he's in danger of being found out to a degree. His defensive game is very good but for me he's behind both POM and Heaslip for Ireland, nevermind the Lions.

I'd agree with that. He doesn't look to link with other players well enough presently. Conan is showing more to his game at present for me.

Clegg

Conan's last few performances have come against sub-standard opposition. He has been great, but they've been in glorified training runs. He's a good player, but he isn't on Stander's level yet. I will say that he's better at offloading the ball. He almost always looks to get his hands free to pop the ball out. Stander can be too bosh centric at times.

Neil3030

I heartily look forward to the Conan v Stander debates come next season's 6 Nations, I must say.

molloyjh

I haven't been commenting on players form on tour because I simply haven't been watching it all that much or all that closely. In terms of Henshaw I'd tend to agree that he hasn't shown a huge amount for Leinster or Ireland the last season. He's been solid as a rock but not exactly the most dynamic. Which is disappointing given his potential skill set. I'm not really sure why that is. He has a kicking game (or at least appeared to early on in his career) that could be used at 12 for example. I've always been a bit concerned about his distribution though. He can offload well, but his passing game outside that has never really impressed me that much.

The problem is that both Leinster and Ireland are stuck for quality 12s so that's where he's needed. He can get that go forward and tie down defenders well so while not flashy it's probably the best use of the available talent. Like Stander it would be nice to see more strings to his bow.

Neil3030

I think in many respects Stander and Henshaw are in similar situations - a long hard season for province and country, and a very direct style of play. Not hardly surprising that neither are setting the world on fire now that we're approaching the end of June.

irishbucsfan

awec wrote: »

Henshaw has been poor, let's stop fannying about.

For all this talk of Stander being a bit one dimensional (which he is), there seems to be a reluctance to say the same for Henshaw (and it is equally true for him as well) who has been even worse than Stander.

And the thing about Henshaw is he doesn't really do much better for Ireland either. It's not as if you can say that his boshing is a result of Gatland, he is just as bad in green. But for whatever reason he escapes criticism and has excuses made while Stander's limitations are highlighted front and centre.

People comparing Stander to Heaslip, what a waste of time. Completely different players. This is like comparing Heaslip to Vunipola, a waste of time as they are entirely different.

I definitely disagree about Henshaw anyway. What has he done poorly? I haven't seen him making any errors or giving away penalties (which is where I'd call Stander poor). Henshaw has been a defensive warrior, just not done much going forward aside from his physical direct running stuff.