what is the big thing about the Lions?

daheff · 11-06-2013 12:05pm #1

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

I know its been going for 50/60 years and is 'technically' seen as international grade rugby..but from my view
A-Its an excuse to get a GB team (including Ireland in there)
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.
C- In the professional era, the warm up games are a farce because any internationals (of the country the tour is in) are usually withdrawn and/or the warm up team has other games on and wont play their best team leading to one sided matches. Compound this with semi-pro/amateur players losing the rag with Lions players and thumping/biting /kicking the professionals and causing injury

So can somebody please explain the draw and appeal of the Lions coz i dont see it

Dravokivich · 11-06-2013 12:06pm

It's been going on for longer than 50/60's years.

So reckon it might be an idea to look up on it some, before trying to dismiss it.

thomond2006 · 11-06-2013 12:07pm

First of all the Lions is a money maker for all parties. That's why it (still) happens. Second of all, it's rugby tradition has been happening for over 100 years.

Buer · 11-06-2013 12:08pm

Dravokivich wrote: »

It's been going on for longer than 50/60's years.

So reckon it might be an idea to look up on it some, before trying to dismiss it.

Indeed. There's nothing that anyone can post that isn't revealed in 5 minutes of looking up Wikipedia.

irishbucsfan · 11-06-2013 12:08pm

For me it's about the history and the tour ethos. It's also the highest honour for British and Irish players really.

JustinDee · 11-06-2013 12:16pm

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.

Grimebox · 11-06-2013 12:19pm

daheff wrote: »

A-Its an excuse to get a GB team (including Ireland in there)

Why is this a bad thing?

subfreq · 11-06-2013 12:23pm

I think in the modern era it where nations are evening out (NZ not withstanding) it would be good to see the Lions go for grand slam tours against the 4 southern nation countries and play warm ups against France and Italy.

almighty1 · 11-06-2013 12:24pm

daheff wrote: »

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

I know its been going for 50/60 years and is 'technically' seen as international grade rugby..but from my view
A-Its an excuse to get a GB team (including Ireland in there)
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.
C- In the professional era, the warm up games are a farce because any internationals (of the country the tour is in) are usually withdrawn and/or the warm up team has other games on and wont play their best team leading to one sided matches. Compound this with semi-pro/amateur players losing the rag with Lions players and thumping/biting /kicking the professionals and causing injury

So can somebody please explain the draw and appeal of the Lions coz i dont see it

I have to say I'm in total agreement with the above.

trouttrout · 11-06-2013 12:27pm

Second test 2009, that is all

thomond2006 · 11-06-2013 12:32pm

trouttrout wrote: »

Second test 2009, that is all

Rugby Awesomeness

Peregrine · 11-06-2013 12:37pm

daheff wrote: »

I know its been going for 50/60 years and is 'technically' seen as international grade rugby..but from my view
A-Its an excuse to get a GB team (including Ireland in there)
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.
C- In the professional era, the warm up games are a farce because any internationals (of the country the tour is in) are usually withdrawn and/or the warm up team has other games on and wont play their best team leading to one sided matches. Compound this with semi-pro/amateur players losing the rag with Lions players and thumping/biting /kicking the professionals and causing injury

First of all, it's been going on for 125 years or so.

A: What's wrong with a Great Britain and Ireland team? Why do we need an excuse to have a traditional combined touring team? Rugby started in Great Britain and Ireland.
B: Nobody sees it that way. Trust me when it started in the 1880s, there were a whole lot less teams to play.
C: How many tours have you watched? There have been many good warm up matches, they've lost and drew a few of them. But I do agree there is a small problem there now with teams not playing their best players leading to slaughter and eventually injuries.

WorldRugby99 · 11-06-2013 3:18pm

No one can deny the lions is no longer the pinnacle-winning the world cup is now. there was no world cup in the old days of course-as an event world cup is now on a magnitude all of its own. and lets be honest-i doubt too many players would trade their grandslams and heineken medals for a lions cap. And yes Much of it is all sky hype as they dont have the six nations/world cup,so they big up the lions into probably a lot more than it actually is(and i imagine plenty of journos enjoy their trips too!) And to throw more negatives in-increasingly more of the tour games are becoming a farce.

That said-we tend to get the same teams playing against each other all the time.in the old days you welcomed the allblacks or the springboks every 4 or 5 years or something,not every autumn virtually. so the lions does provide something different,something unique,something half way between world cups to bring a welcome distraction from the same old matches and fixtures,seeing combos together you wont again is good to watch.So yes it is a novelty act i guess now.

Win or lose the series,does it matter? i guess thats the question.what relevance does it actually have?

twinytwo · 11-06-2013 3:22pm

thomond2006 wrote: »

First of all the Lions is a money maker for all parties. That's why it (still) happens. Second of all, it's rugby tradition has been happening for over 100 years.

TBF its massive for the players involved, these are the biggest test games a player can play. Most NZ/AUS/SA players get one shot at the lions if they are lucky. Tell them its all about the money. The test games in 09 provided some of the best rugby iv ever seen played

Swiwi · 11-06-2013 3:37pm

Personally, I really enjoy the Lions, it has a touch of the "old-school" about it, and it's pretty unique - most players from SANZAR only get to play the Lions once (maximum twice) in their playing careers.

In theory, the Lions should have recorded more victories over SANZAR than they have, but nevertheless the Lions still provide a better standard of opposition than the individual countries - eg it's hard to see Scotland beating the ABs with their current team, but I could easily see the Lions doing so.

There is also a great atmosphere at the grounds, and tests are more often than not highly absorbing & exciting affairs.

I wouldn't necessarily mind a "Latin" lions either - the best of France/Italy/Argentina

WorldRugby99 · 11-06-2013 4:11pm

twinytwo wrote: »

TBF its massive for the players involved, these are the biggest test games a player can play. Most NZ/AUS/SA players get one shot at the lions if they are lucky. Tell them its all about the money. The test games in 09 provided some of the best rugby iv ever seen played

just isnt true in my opinion.How can you compare a world cup final-the global audience,the large domestic audience,victory parades etc with a lions tour test?
winning world cups is special and the pinnacle.Sorry to say win or lose,the lions simply isnt.No one is going to be calling these lions players beating a pretty average aussie side 'legends'. I suspect 1 or 2 irish fans,becuase ireland has a regrettably very poor world cup record,are simply over egging the lions as some sort of substitute.

OldRio · 11-06-2013 4:15pm

WorldRugby99 wrote: »

Sorry to say win or lose,the lions simply isnt.No one is going to be calling these lions players beating a pretty average aussie side 'legends'. I suspect 1 or 2 irish fans,becuase ireland has a regrettably very poor world cup record,are simply over egging the lions as some sort of substitute.

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

Ignore button activated.

Buer · 11-06-2013 4:19pm

twinytwo wrote: »

TBF its massive for the players involved, these are the biggest test games a player can play. Most NZ/AUS/SA players get one shot at the lions if they are lucky. Tell them its all about the money. The test games in 09 provided some of the best rugby iv ever seen played

Indeed. Nathan Sharpe, 11 years as a Wallaby. 116 caps. Never got to represent his country against the Lions. It's a massive deal for the opposition as much as the Lions players.

WorldRugby99 · 11-06-2013 4:36pm

OldRio wrote: »

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

Ignore button activated.

Pathetic old rio arent you? give an opinion and you dont like it-no counter argument just pathetic dribble.

Ask a world cup winner of any nation-world cup or lions tour-you will have your answer.
Ask non world cup contenders they may well say something else they may win.

JustinDee · 11-06-2013 4:41pm

WorldRugby99 wrote: »

just isnt true in my opinion.How can you compare a world cup final-the global audience,the large domestic audience,victory parades etc with a lions tour test?

And you're entitled to your opinion. Don't watch any of it then.

WorldRugby99 wrote: »

winning world cups is special and the pinnacle.Sorry to say win or lose,the lions simply isnt

You're not a player so you're not really ever going to be in the position to credibly state this as fact. Again, its just your opinion.

trouttrout · 11-06-2013 4:44pm

WorldRugby99 wrote: »

Pathetic old rio arent you? give an opinion and you dont like it-no counter argument just pathetic dribble.

Ask a world cup winner of any nation-world cup or lions tour-you will have your answer.
Ask non world cup contenders they may well say something else they may win.

Everyone of your posts either contains references to Irish people being blinded by bias when it comes to the national team or negative critique of Irish rugby players, no wonder he's sick of reading your posts

daheff · 11-06-2013 4:46pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

For me it's about the history and the tour ethos. It's also the highest honour for British and Irish players really.

Is it though? As another poster said...most players would give up a lions cap for a world cup /heineken cup (probably any major domestic honour)

Grimebox wrote: »

Why is this a bad thing?

I never said it was. But it does seem to be founded in the era of Ireland & UK being one union (with thanks to Dravokivich for pointing this out :P) ...so I can understand why they had a combined representative team.

subfreq wrote: »

I think in the modern era it where nations are evening out (NZ not withstanding) it would be good to see the Lions go for grand slam tours against the 4 southern nation countries and play warm ups against France and Italy.

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?

Swiwi wrote: »

I wouldn't necessarily mind a "Latin" lions either - the best of France/Italy/Argentina

Why not a SANZAR representative team then?

WorldRugby99 · 11-06-2013 4:48pm

JustinDee wrote: »

And you're entitled to your opinion. Don't watch any of it then.

You're not a player so you're not really ever going to be in the position to credibly state this as fact. Again, its just your opinion.

i have never said lions tour isnt an event-it is-im watching and following like everyone else but to compare it to a world cup is simply in my opinions rubbish and is buying into the sky hype.
what would you prefer honestly-ireland to win world cup with massive homecoming parade in dublin or sexton,o driscoll and o connell to play their part in beating a pretty mediocre aussie team in this lions series?

martin johnson,francois pienaar,lawrence dallaglio,nick farr jones and richie mccaw have all stated winning world cup biggest thing of their rugby careers-i have read so probably many others too.although granted pienaar never played the lions.

JustinDee · 11-06-2013 4:48pm

WorldRugby99 wrote: »

No one is going to be calling these lions players beating a pretty average aussie side 'legends'

Hmmm...

Guess Who? wrote:

aussies backline is a class above lions in my opinion-the skillsets,the slick moves,handling etc- genia,o connor,beale,ioane and add in possible new guys like folau,mogg and lealiifano its some amount of talent

daheff · 11-06-2013 4:50pm

WorldRugby99 wrote: »

That said-we tend to get the same teams playing against each other all the time.in the old days you welcomed the allblacks or the springboks every 4 or 5 years or something,not every autumn virtually.

IRB have recognised this overexposure factor and have changed the way tours happen. Its back to the good ole days of playing a series of tests against countries each summer rather than playing them all the same summer (& Autumn).

Nimrod 7 wrote: »

First of all, it's been going on for 125 years or so.

A: What's wrong with a Great Britain and Ireland team? Why do we need an excuse to have a traditional combined touring team? Rugby started in Great Britain and Ireland.

B: Nobody sees it that way. Trust me when it started in the 1880s, there were a whole lot less teams to play.

C: How many tours have you watched? There have been many good warm up matches, they've lost and drew a few of them. But I do agree there is a small problem there now with teams not playing their best players leading to slaughter and eventually injuries.

A: dont need to have an excuse...but it seems that the Lions is one
B: I see it this way. I know there were fewer teams back in the early days of rugby.
C: I've watched a few...but i've never gotten into them ...never seen an affiliation to the Lions...if anything anytime i've watched them I've hoped they'd lose.

JustinDee · 11-06-2013 4:50pm

WorldRugby99 wrote: »

i have never said lions tour isnt an event-it is-im watching and following like everyone else but to compare it to a world cup is simply in my opinions rubbish and is buying into the sky hype.
what would you prefer honestly-ireland to win world cup with massive homecoming parade in dublin or sexton,o driscoll and o connell to play their part in beating a pretty mediocre aussie team in this lions series?

You're not a player, and by the sound of it, don't ever get to ask a player their view on what they feel about being called up to The Lions.

The two need not be compared. They are massive honours for a player. I don't give a stuff about the result of the series so long as our players get the most from it, as it can be the making of them.

WorldRugby99 · 11-06-2013 4:51pm

trouttrout wrote: »

Everyone of your posts either contains references to Irish people being blinded by bias when it comes to the national team or negative critique of Irish rugby players, no wonder he's sick of reading your posts

its a well known fact this board contains many irish fans blinded by bias. Cant we post unless its from a pro irish,everything irish is great point of view?
I hail from ulster,but now live in england,but consider myself british yes,so im obviously,although supporting ulster(and bath now too!) not going to be a pro-irish as most on here

JustinDee · 11-06-2013 4:52pm

WorldRugby99 wrote: »

its a well known fact this board contains many irish fans blinded by bias. Cant we post unless its from a pro irish,everything irish is great point of view?
I hail from ulster,but now live in england,but consider myself british yes,so im obviously,although supporting ulster(and bath now too!) not going to be a pro-irish as most on here

Great. I'd suggest you go and do just that then.
You're obviously just in this for the argument so I'll not waste any more time replying to obvious potstirs.

WorldRugby99 · 11-06-2013 4:54pm

JustinDee wrote: »

You're not a player, and by the sound of it, don't ever get to ask a player their view on what they feel about being called up to The Lions.

The two need not be compared. They are massive honours for a player. I don't give a stuff about the result of the series so long as our players get the most from it, as it can be the making of them.

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

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?!

trouttrout · 11-06-2013 4:55pm

WorldRugby99 wrote: »

its a well known fact this board contains many irish fans blinded by bias. Cant we post unless its from a pro irish,everything irish is great point of view?
I hail from ulster,but now live in england,but consider myself british yes,so im obviously,although supporting ulster(and bath now too!) not going to be a pro-irish as most on here

"A well known fact"

I had a laugh at that one anyway

Dravokivich · 11-06-2013 4:56pm

WorldRugby99 wrote: »

martin johnson,francois pienaar,lawrence dallaglio,nick farr jones and richie mccaw have all stated winning world cup biggest thing of their rugby careers-i have read so probably many others too.although granted pienaar never played the lions.

Wilkinson prefers the HEC.

JustinDee · 11-06-2013 5:00pm

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 · 11-06-2013 5:05pm

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 · 11-06-2013 5:05pm

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 · 11-06-2013 5:06pm

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 · 11-06-2013 5:10pm

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 · 11-06-2013 5:12pm

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 · 11-06-2013 5:12pm

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 · 11-06-2013 5:13pm

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 · 11-06-2013 5:16pm

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 · 11-06-2013 5:26pm

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 · 11-06-2013 5:28pm

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.

11-06-2013 5:38pm

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 · 11-06-2013 7:48pm

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 · 11-06-2013 8:06pm

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 · 11-06-2013 11:00pm

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 · 11-06-2013 11:10pm

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 · 12-06-2013 12:19am

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 · 12-06-2013 9:54am

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 · 12-06-2013 10:11am

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 · 12-06-2013 10:22am

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!

what is the big thing about the Lions?

Comments