Lions 2013 Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread

Podge_irl · 01-07-2013 08:46AM

If players can appeal bans I see no reason why the IRB shouldn't be able to.

fitz · 01-07-2013 08:48AM

Le vieux renard wrote: »

If BOD leads out the Lions and they lose, it is not a sporting injustice, it just simply means the Lions weren't good enough.

If that's what happens, I think it will be another instance of a coach letting Drico's legacy down. Kidney ruined BOD's last crack at the World Cup stage, and Gatland is doing his damnedest to make sure he does the same with this Lions tour.

If the Lions have are to have any chance, they need to stop trying to defend their way to a win.

Buer · 01-07-2013 09:07AM

Hearing begins around 10.30am Irish time, I believe. We should know result not long after lunch. At least I don't need to be awake at 4am to get this result...

irishbucsfan · 01-07-2013 09:13AM

fitz wrote: »

If that's what happens, I think it will be another instance of a coach letting Drico's legacy down. Kidney ruined BOD's last crack at the World Cup stage, and Gatland is doing his damnedest to make sure he does the same with this Lions tour.

If the Lions have are to have any chance, they need to stop trying to defend their way to a win.

What they need is a decent performance from someone who knows how to play 12 effectively at the highest level and a half back who will take some of the pressure off the back line and help the side maintain possession. Roberts and Phillips will be important additions, I really really hope Roberts is fit.

Warburton is a massive loss though. They need someone who will focus on the breakdown in possession in the back row. Heaslip has done it in the past when playing with SOB I suppose. But the pack have lost their two best players now imo, so that will make things most difficult.

Quint2010 · 01-07-2013 09:21AM

So with Warburton out who will Gatland pick at seven? SOB would have to be favourite.

former legend · 01-07-2013 09:24AM

Quint2010 wrote: »

So with Warburton out who will Gatland pick at seven? SOB would have to be favourite.

Think Tipuric would be the closest like-for-like replacement for Warburton but certainly the indications are that O'Brien is ahead of him at the moment. I think a Lydiate-O'Brien-Heaslip backrow has a nice balance to it, but you could also argue that bringing Tipuric in for breakdown work and Faletau for ball carrying would work as well.

.ak · 01-07-2013 09:36AM

I actually think Croft played better at 6 than Lydiate did. Both were poor imo, but Lydiate didn't go out there and do what was required. A backrow of Croft, SOB and Heaslip/Faletau would have a nice balance too it. People (Quinnell) go on about what difference Faletau brings to the balance of the backrow. It's balderdash really, they're almost like for like. Faletau is probably the stronger carrier, but they both get through a huge amount of donkey work around the park.

Buer · 01-07-2013 09:42AM

Quint2010 wrote: »

So with Warburton out who will Gatland pick at seven? SOB would have to be favourite.

If he picks Tipuric, I will go bananas. Tipuric is a talented player but has been one of the least impressive players for me in Australia. Has had very little impact in the physical exchanges and is not someone that will be physically up to the challenge next week, for me. He's a hugely talented guy but needs more power.

I think there's a good reason he was on the bench for the last midweek game alongside the likes of Stevens, Best and Hogg. They're the guys that are furthest away from the test side.

Has to be SOB with Lydiate at blindside and a toss up at 8.

Quint2010 · 01-07-2013 09:42AM

.ak wrote: »

I actually think Croft played better at 6 than Lydiate did. Both were poor imo, but Lydiate didn't go out there and do what was required. A backrow of Croft, SOB and Heaslip/Faletau would have a nice balance too it. People (Quinnell) go on about what difference Faletau brings to the balance of the backrow. It's balderdash really, they're almost like for like. Faletau is probably the stronger carrier, but they both get through a huge amount of donkey work around the park.

Think Croft should definitely play. The option off the back of the line-out he gives is crucial to the way The Lions play. If he goes with Croft and SOB I think Gatland will stick with Heaslip to do the donkey work.

01-07-2013 09:45AM

Quint2010 wrote: »

Think Croft should definitely play. The option off the back of the line-out he gives is crucial to the way The Lions play. If he goes with Croft and SOB I think Gatland will stick with Heaslip to do the donkey work.

But surely the inability of any of the 3 hookers available to hit the back of the lineout means that this usefulness is limited?

Buer · 01-07-2013 09:45AM

.ak wrote: »

I actually think Croft played better at 6 than Lydiate did. Both were poor imo, but Lydiate didn't go out there and do what was required. A backrow of Croft, SOB and Heaslip/Faletau would have a nice balance too it. People (Quinnell) go on about what difference Faletau brings to the balance of the backrow. It's balderdash really, they're almost like for like. Faletau is probably the stronger carrier, but they both get through a huge amount of donkey work around the park.

I think you're being harsh on Lydiate. He didn't have a massively impressive performance but I would have described it as quietly efficient. Only Parling made more tackles than him and Genia did not have the space to work at the fringes that he's so lethal at.

I think he'll retain his place, especially is SOB is coming in. I can't see them having Croft and SOB in the same side.

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience · 01-07-2013 09:49AM

Croft's usefulness in the lineout on this tour is hugely negated by the awful lineout play and inability of the hookers to hit the back consistently, it's not a good enough reason to start him

.ak · 01-07-2013 09:51AM

Buer wrote: »

I think you're being harsh on Lydiate. He didn't have a massively impressive performance but I would have described it as quietly efficient. Only Parling made more tackles than him and Genia did not have the space to work at the fringes that he's so lethal at.

I think he'll retain his place, especially is SOB is coming in. I can't see them having Croft and SOB in the same side.

It's a case of stats painting the wrong picture though Buer. I may be a bit harsh on him but I found his tackling was incredibly sloppy. He ended up around the ankles of most players and let them over the gain line, and more importantly let them away with the pass. We didn't see any of his trademark big hits that'd galvanize an aggressive defensive side. At the 50m mark he was huffing and puffing and barely hitting rucks. Infact, his ruck hitting was fairly ineffective all day.

As a pro 6 he did an allright job, but he's just coming back from massive lay off on the sidelines and I don't think he has the pace and power for this level currently. He's the ideal bench man tho.

Quint2010 · 01-07-2013 09:52AM

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience wrote: »

Croft's usefulness in the lineout on this tour is hugely negated by the awful lineout play and inability of the hookers to hit the back consistently, it's not a good enough reason to start him

But surely this can be worked on in training? How else do hookers improve their throwing?

Buer · 01-07-2013 09:52AM

Deleted User wrote: »

But surely the inability of any of the 3 hookers available to hit the back of the lineout means that this usefulness is limited?

Indeed. If they're not going to trust the hooker to throw to 6, then having a specialist jumper for there is superfluous. SOB is an alright jumper anyway. He's not Croft, but he's able to get up and win his ball.

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience · 01-07-2013 09:54AM

Quint2010 wrote: »

But surely this can be worked on in training? How else do hookers improve their throwing?

It's not just the hookers though, the set piece itself is totally rigid and smacks of a touring side with precious little time to prepare

I think Warburton missing out will see SOB move in at 7 which could be good news for Heaslip who might be kept on for his lineout play

Toby F makes the bench

01-07-2013 09:55AM

.ak wrote: »

It's a case of stats painting the wrong picture though Buer. I may be a bit harsh on him but I found his tackling was incredibly sloppy. He ended up around the ankles of most players and let them over the gain line, and more importantly let them away with the pass. We didn't see any of his trademark big hits that'd galvanize an aggressive defensive side. At the 50m mark he was huffing and puffing and barely hitting rucks. Infact, his ruck hitting was fairly ineffective all day.

As a pro 6 he did an allright job, but he's just coming back from massive lay off on the sidelines and I don't think he has the pace and power for this level currently. He's the ideal bench man tho.

That's actually his trademark! He sets em up for the other players to steal ball from. They actually went through this "chop tackle" in detail before one of the midweek games saying how it's become a change to have players allowing the tackled player to make ground. As a result it's become a strangely useful weapon as if you have supporting players on the defensive side they have a split second longer to get the hands on the ball as the attacking team are slightly further from the tackle area.

.ak · 01-07-2013 09:57AM

Deleted User wrote: »

That's actually his trademark! He sets em up for the other players to steal ball from. They actually went through this "chop tackle" in detail before one of the midweek games saying how it's become a change to have players allowing the tackled player to make ground, and as a result it's become a strangely useful weapon as if you have supporting players on the defensive side they have a split second longer to get the hands on the ball as the attacking team are slightly further from the tackle area.

I know what you're getting at, and I agree, but what I saw wasn't what he usually does. He usually catches the player low, but not at their ankles. He wasn't grounding them, that was the issue. There was no chance for Sam to get over the players because most of them remained on their feet and got the ball away.

.ak · 01-07-2013 09:58AM

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience wrote: »

It's not just the hookers though, the set piece itself is totally rigid and smacks of a touring side with precious little time to prepare

I think Warburton missing out will see SOB move in at 7 which could be good news for Heaslip who might be kept on for his lineout play

Toby F makes the bench

Can't see Faletau on the bench unless Croft is there also.

... which is entirely possible, I suppose.

Quint2010 · 01-07-2013 09:58AM

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience wrote: »

It's not just the hookers though, the set piece itself is totally rigid and smacks of a touring side with precious little time to prepare

I think Warburton missing out will see SOB move in at 7 which could be good news for Heaslip who might be kept on for his lineout play

Toby F makes the bench

Looking at that another way means that the only change to the backrow which was outplayed on Saturday is an enforced one to the best performer. Yes they nullified Genia but as was showed on Saturday that's not enough. The Lions need to attack more and create their own patterns and worry less about the opposition.

Buer · 01-07-2013 10:00AM

.ak wrote: »

It's a case of stats painting the wrong picture though Buer. I may be a bit harsh on him but I found his tackling was incredibly sloppy. He ended up around the ankles of most players and let them over the gain line, and more importantly let them away with the pass. We didn't see any of his trademark big hits that'd galvanize an aggressive defensive side. At the 50m mark he was huffing and puffing and barely hitting rucks. Infact, his ruck hitting was fairly ineffective all day.

As a pro 6 he did an allright job, but he's just coming back from massive lay off on the sidelines and I don't think he has the pace and power for this level currently. He's the ideal bench man tho.

That's often the way in which Lydiate tackles. He does not go for the driving back in the tackle type of exchange but prefers to chop them down low and bring them to ground. Himself and Charteris were superb at it in the WC.

He goes in first man, soak tackles and yields the gain line but it leaves the man open on the deck for a second player to come in and jackal the ball and slow it down. That, in turn, seriously limits the speed that Genia is getting the ball.

Buer · 01-07-2013 10:05AM

Quint2010 wrote: »

Looking at that another way means that the only change to the backrow which was outplayed on Saturday is an enforced one to the best performer. Yes they nullified Genia but as was showed on Saturday that's not enough. The Lions need to attack more and create their own patterns and worry less about the opposition.

I don't know. I think the Lions lost because of their failure to attack and use possession rather than how the back row performed. Genia was nullified and Australia only got a try in the closing minutes because of some poor use of possession (loose kicking) by the Lions leading to it. Aside from that, 6 points were conceded directly by the scrum and 3 due to a silly offside by Lydiate (the Lions were offside all day).

If the Lions actually attacked them and used their possession, I've no doubt they'd have had the series wrapped up now. Back row were, as a unit, pretty good. They turned over the opposition, did well in the line out and protected their own ball. They only really got loose and sloppy when they had a patchwork back row in the last 15 minutes.

.ak · 01-07-2013 10:13AM

Buer wrote: »

That's often the way in which Lydiate tackles. He does not go for the driving back in the tackle type of exchange but prefers to chop them down low and bring them to ground. Himself and Charteris were superb at it in the WC.

He goes in first man, soak tackles and yields the gain line but it leaves the man open on the deck for a second player to come in and jackal the ball and slow it down. That, in turn, seriously limits the speed that Genia is getting the ball.

Fair enough. I did know about this tactic pre game. I guess what I'm trying to say is it wasn't used effectively as he usually does it IMO.

clsmooth · 01-07-2013 10:28AM

Edit: Double post

clsmooth · 01-07-2013 10:29AM

Reading the BBC Rugby boards, a lot of people calling for BOD to be dropped saying he's off form and was out on his feet for the last 10 last week. They're calling for a Roberts/Tuilagi/Davies combo with the one missing out, on the bench. A few calling for Farell saying that Sexton has had a bad tour. Quite a few calling for Gray in the second row.

Quint2010 · 01-07-2013 10:31AM

Buer wrote: »

I don't know. I think the Lions lost because of their failure to attack and use possession rather than how the back row performed. Genia was nullified and Australia only got a try in the closing minutes because of some poor use of possession (loose kicking) by the Lions leading to it. Aside from that, 6 points were conceded directly by the scrum and 3 due to a silly offside by Lydiate (the Lions were offside all day).

If the Lions actually attacked them and used their possession, I've no doubt they'd have had the series wrapped up now. Back row were, as a unit, pretty good. They turned over the opposition, did well in the line out and protected their own ball. They only really got loose and sloppy when they had a patchwork back row in the last 15 minutes.

The reason The Lions lost on Saturday was the set-piece. The scrum can easily be rectified by the addition of Hibbard and Corbisiero. And Croft is the best line-out operator left in the squad and him, along with Richie Gray, should come in. Who knows-Gatland does have the option to play Croft in the second row but then that would weaken the scrum. Think Gray should start with a backrow of Croft, SOB and Heaslip (who gets the nod for experience and donkey work).

Tox56 · 01-07-2013 10:31AM

MBolgia wrote: »

I'm much more concerned about possible precedents set by Horwill being found not guilty of what was, at best, reckless and dangerous play than I am of possible precedents set for future citings. As a coach, and a parent of two young players, I want my kids and all of my players to be safe on the pitch at all times. Horwill should not have been playing last Saturday. Congratulations to the IRB for sending a message out to all players at all levels around the world; "you are responsible for the safety of your opponent, your teammate and yourself."

Horwill to miss Saturday's test? BOD to captain his final ever Lions game and win? Now that's justice.

I agree on the Horwill thing, Aussies would be best served keeping shut on this, Horwill was extremely lucky to play the 2nd test and he ended up having a massive influence in them winning it. They got away with one and benefitted hugely from it, they've got a chance in the final test now and they should really be happy with that.

.ak · 01-07-2013 10:33AM

clsmooth wrote: »

Reading the BBC Rugby boards, a lot of people calling for BOD to be dropped saying he's off form and was out on his feet for the last 10 last week. They're calling for a Roberts/Tuilagi/Davies combo with the one missing out, on the bench. A few calling for Farell saying that Sexton has had a bad tour. Quite a few calling for Gray in the second row.

Anyone who thinks Gray should be in the test side based on what we've seen on tour is probably going to miss the fact BOD has been playing inside and outside a misfiring 13 at 12. Farrell over Sexton is just the English bias.

Sexton had a top notch first game, but Farrell would've struggled big time with the pressure of Saturday's game.

Tox56 · 01-07-2013 10:34AM

clsmooth wrote: »

Reading the BBC Rugby boards, a lot of people calling for BOD to be dropped saying he's off form and was out on his feet for the last 10 last week. They're calling for a Roberts/Tuilagi/Davies combo with the one missing out, on the bench. A few calling for Farell saying that Sexton has had a bad tour. Quite a few calling for Gray in the second row.

There was widespread outrage and condemnation on there of the decision to exclude Richie Gray from the test squad, that says a lot

.ak · 01-07-2013 10:35AM

Quint2010 wrote: »

The reason The Lions lost on Saturday was the set-piece. The scrum can easily be rectified by the addition of Hibbard and Corbisiero. And Croft is the best line-out operator left in the squad and him, along with Richie Gray, should come in. Who knows-Gatland does have the option to play Croft in the second row but then that would weaken the scrum. Think Gray should start with a backrow of Croft, SOB and Heaslip (who gets the nod for experience and donkey work).

If you bring Gray in you'll completely lose another body at the breakdown. He's been completely ineffectual at the breakdown, his carrying is non-existent. Would you pick him based on the fact he's 6'11"? That won't matter squat when it's our entire line out machine that isn't functioning. Parling is the better operator and better jumper.

Lions 2013 Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread

Comments