Lions 2017 [MOD WARNING IN OP]

awec wrote: »

I don't want to bang this drum again but you aren't going to get a try like that out of Henshaw and Payne, or Henshaw and Daly.

Maybe not but you would certainly get more guile in attack, like a certain Irish Kiwi Schmidt could deliver against the All Blacks.

sydthebeat wrote: »

the hurricanes game is the only one not really moving much....

Fair enough given they're guaranteed to have no test players available.

With that said, the Lions are going to be starting a complete dirt tracker team (Laidlaw, Biggar, Henderson, Nowell etc.) and the Hurricanes are only going to lose Coles and Ardie Savea (if even) from their pack. Their halfbacks are the big loss but the rest of their back line will still look pretty decent, I'd say.

I still reckon the Hurricanes could win that game outright.

sydthebeat wrote: »

yes me too.

Ill assume they will have T/T/T at 9, with Black at 10..... Laumape and Aso in the middle, cory jane and Lam probably outside with NMS at 15... or jordie barrett if NMS is with the ABs

irresistible

Easy. By then the Lions will be up to full speed. Thanks to Fazzas defense coaching, Borthwizard's pack and The Howlitzer's incredible attack. The Lions are sure to win by 20 points and Buer's betting slip will end up in tatters on the ground.

Lyra Long Drug wrote:

also they should get ringrose and hartley on the plane over.

Ah jaysus would ya stop

The Lions brand is hanging by a thread in the medium term. Another tour like this one is out of the question. It will only take one or two top players to exclude themselves from the next tour to really jeopardise, and I can see this happening - a well funded club offers their star player a bonus not to tour, for example. It's going to happen. Season is already too long, and the timing is already stacked against the Lions players, they just won't want to go for it unless the schedule is fair and reasonably, which this one is certainly not.

BoardsMember wrote: »

The Lions brand is hanging by a thread in the medium term. Another tour like this one is out of the question. It will only take one or two top players to exclude themselves from the next tour to really jeopardise, and I can see this happening - a well funded club offers their star player a bonus not to tour, for example. It's going to happen. Season is already too long, and the timing is already stacked against the Lions players, they just won't want to go for it unless the schedule is fair and reasonably, which this one is certainly not.

Star players have opted out of tours in the past.

It is not a potentially new phenomenon. Edwards & JPR both opted out of the 77 tour ..... they were probably marquee players number 1 & 2 in these islands at that time.

The concept rumbled on ....... and long may it continue.

For me the big issue these days is the lack of preparation time ..... we should be looking at 3 weeks from meeting up to playing game 1.
Where those three weeks is spent is up for grabs ..... For me it would be 1 week in the NH and 2 weeks in the SH.

The match schedule is fine .... we are bringing 40 players ..... we should be able to be competitive in all games.

penybont exile wrote: »

Star players have opted out of tours in the past.

It is not a potentially new phenomenon. Edwards & JPR both opted out of the 77 tour ..... they were probably marquee players number 1 & 2 in these islands at that time.

The concept rumbled on ....... and long may it continue.

For me the big issue these days is the lack of preparation time ..... we should be looking at 3 weeks from meeting up to playing game 1.
Where those three weeks is spent is up for grabs ..... For me it would be 1 week in the NH and 2 weeks in the SH.

The match schedule is fine .... we are bringing 40 players ..... we should be able to be competitive in all games.

I dont see how 40 players is enough. It's not even 2 match day squads. We now have 3 games in 10 days. How does that work? How will the players be come the test matches? Why is there a match between test 1 & 2. I just think that there is so much more emphasis on player welfare that something needs to change dramatically to ensure the medium term success of the concept. We already have a number of international players playing for clubs abroad knowing that this means giving up their chance of playing for their country. That's a relatively new phenomenon, and it is for money. It's not a huge stretch to suggest that this trend could be experienced within the Lions in the coming years. It's all conjecture of course, I just feel that even amongst the younger rugby fan, that the Lions "brand" is not what it was, and it is only going one direction.

Buer wrote:

I'd say that could be quite close to the team. It'll be a toss up for the 9 jersey. Webb went well today. Murray will need to respond on Saturday.

Webb was good today but his kicks maybe were a little deep whether that was a game plan or not I don't know. I think it's significant that gatland has paired Murray and farrell up for their toughest test to date. I expect them to start together in the first test.

Buer wrote:

Prop is going to be interesting. It's the one area where I think all 6 of those who have travelled are going to feature in a test match at one point or another. They've all performed well thus far.

McGrath put in a very good shift today and for me put himself at the top of the list I thought makos scrummaging was questionable at best the other day and he will be better suited as an impact player around the 60 mark. Furlong is nearly nailed on imo one of very few who is but he will need a good game Saturday as the others have all been solid thus far

The real mccoy 91 wrote: »

For the 25 minutes today the lions had the majority of the time he was on imo he is worth a place for his defensive and set piece work. I feel gatland may play a kicking game and put the blacks under pressure in there own territory and attack the lineouts with itoje kruis and pom. I'd expect him to start on Saturday and with a good performance put himself in the reckoning

Apart from SA has anyone ever beaten the AB's with these tactics?

P.Walnuts wrote: »

Is there any rule that would explicitly deem the following tactic unlawful :

Knocking the ball on deliberately when in possession, winning a penalty from the subsequent scrum and kicking for territory/points. Rinse and repeat.

Acts contrary to good sportsmanship. Hard to prove, though.

I suppose a broadly similar example would be if you win a penalty on 79 minutes and have a minute to take the kick. You let the clock wind down and deliberately stick it into touch. It's a penalty to the other team for not making a genuine effort to go for the posts.

EDIT: Obviously the deliberate knock on, as Basil states, would probably be more appropriate. I assume you mean someone just carrying the ball and deliberately spilling it as opposed to lashing it forward or knocking a pass on mid air as is with most deliberate knock ons. It would be near impossible to prove. If it happened a few times I would imagine the referee would have a word with the captain and warn him. Alternatively, the referee could just become extremely lenient at the scrum and the benefit of the knock on is lost.

Italy did similar about 12 or 13 years ago in the 6N. Deliberately scuffed the restart 2 yards to force a scrum against us on halfway at the very start of the game. Came to nothing.