Lions 2013 Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread

fitz · 02-07-2013 12:33PM

Pudsy33 wrote: »

I bet Roberts comes in for BOD :mad:

Trying not to think that Gatland will be stupid enough to pick Davies over BOD.

02-07-2013 12:34PM

1
2 Hibbard
3 Jones
4 AWJ
5
6 Lydiate
7
8 Faletau
9 Phillips
10
11 North
12 Roberts
13
14
15 Halfpenny

Bold are nailed on starters, other's are solid potentials.

Other Welsh players that could be there are (in order of likeliness imo)

5 - Ian Evans
7 - Tipuric
14 - Cuthbert
13 - Davies

10 would be a lot!

wonderfullife · 02-07-2013 12:39PM

Criticising Woodward is unfair. He's paid to give his opinion in the media and even if he wasn't, he's allowed an opinion. Happen to think he's a decent guy, he showed up for BODs function earlier in the year for example to pay tribute to a great player.

RE: Irishbucs and how we should play - There is nothing wrong with how Gatland is trying to play. We showed in the warm up games that when we get it right, it leads to attractive, expansive rugby. Power/strike runners, big forwards creating space out wide, with an exciting backline - it's a perfectly fine gameplan.

My problem is that this style relies on quick ball from setpieces. The Wallabies have outperformed expectations at scrum time and our lineout has been the low point all tour. Add in to the mix Phillips was slow and ponderous Test 1 and Youngs passing was poor Test 2.

If Sexton is standing flat expecting quick ball and gets shut down time and again, then our backline is going nowhere. And it doesn't matter how good BOD, Bowe, North are, if they are backpedalling 3 metres every time to receive the ball it's not going to work.

So we either - get quick ball going off our setpiece or we have to have a Plan B. To me. a Plan B would be to employ an old Munster style performance. Sexton dropping back 2 or 3 metres, playing the corners, playing territory. I can count on 1 hand the amount of times in either Test that Sexton dropped deep to kick to space.

So if our Plan A isn't working there has to be something else. Otherwise the 3rd Test will go exactly as the 1st and 2nd. Very little happening in either backline because both sets of defence is so good.

Bottom line our ball is too slow, the Wallabies are already lined up and it's relatively easy to hurry the 1st receiver into a poor decision. I'm convinced from quick ball our backline can cut the Wallabies open - we have too much pace, skill, technique and intelligence from 10-15 not to do damage to any side in world rugby.

So, yeah , my plan A would be Gatlands power game, the big forwards doing the damage, getting good setpiece and unleashing the backline. Plan B would be to get Sexton to receive the ball a lot deeper and play an old school NH game.

shuffol · 02-07-2013 12:40PM

Gatland would be a brave and probably stupid man to go with 10 Welsh players, should he do so and it not go right he'll be villified.

irishbucsfan · 02-07-2013 12:46PM

wonderfullife wrote: »

Criticising Woodward is unfair. He's paid to give his opinion in the media and even if he wasn't, he's allowed an opinion. Happen to think he's a decent guy, he showed up for BODs function earlier in the year for example to pay tribute to a great player.

RE: Irishbucs and how we should play - There is nothing wrong with how Gatland is trying to play. We showed in the warm up games that when we get it right, it leads to attractive, expansive rugby. Power/strike runners, big forwards creating space out wide, with an exciting backline - it's a perfectly fine gameplan.

My problem is that this style relies on quick ball from setpieces. The Wallabies have outperformed expectations at scrum time and our lineout has been the low point all tour. Add in to the mix Phillips was slow and ponderous Test 1 and Youngs passing was poor Test 2.

If Sexton is standing flat expecting quick ball and gets shut down time and again, then our backline is going nowhere. And it doesn't matter how good BOD, Bowe, North are, if they are backpedalling 3 metres every time to receive the ball it's not going to work.

So we either - get quick ball going off our setpiece or we have to have a Plan B. To me. a Plan B would be to employ an old Munster style performance. Sexton dropping back 2 or 3 metres, playing the corners, playing territory. I can count on 1 hand the amount of times in either Test that Sexton dropped deep to kick to space.

So if our Plan A isn't working there has to be something else. Otherwise the 3rd Test will go exactly as the 1st and 2nd. Very little happening in either backline because both sets of defence is so good.

Bottom line our ball is too slow, the Wallabies are already lined up and it's relatively easy to hurry the 1st receiver into a poor decision. I'm convinced from quick ball our backline can cut the Wallabies open - we have too much pace, skill, technique and intelligence from 10-15 not to do damage to any side in world rugby.

So, yeah , my plan A would be Gatlands power game, the big forwards doing the damage, getting good setpiece and unleashing the backline. Plan B would be to get Sexton to receive the ball a lot deeper and play an old school NH game.

Wait, you would employ a kicking game when our set piece is failing?

Artful_Badger · 02-07-2013 12:51PM

shuffol wrote: »

Gatland would be a brave and probably stupid man to go with 10 Welsh players, should he do so and it not go right he'll be villified.

Its not that big of a change though. There were 8 Welsh starters in the first test team.

stephen_n · 02-07-2013 12:57PM

wonderfullife wrote: »

So we either - get quick ball going off our setpiece or we have to have a Plan B. To me. a Plan B would be to employ an old Munster style performance. Sexton dropping back 2 or 3 metres, playing the corners, playing territory. I can count on 1 hand the amount of times in either Test that Sexton dropped deep to kick to space.

With no lineout?? how would that work

wonderfullife · 02-07-2013 01:00PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Wait, you would employ a kicking game when our set piece is failing?

stephen_n wrote: »

With no lineout?? how would that work

We've not competed well at the lineout in attack or defence. So i'd rather those lineouts are with them pinned down near their 22 than in midfield where we are coughing up ball all the time.

If Sexton is playing the corners, as a Plan B, it's going to be them taking the ball and box-kicking or place kicking back down field. If we can win the territory war then we can at least go short off the lineout, we've taken nearly 90% of ball cleanly off the short lineout, go to the maul in better field position. We had 2 mauls and both gained 10 metres+

Buer · 02-07-2013 01:01PM

We competed multiple times on their ball last weekend.

wonderfullife · 02-07-2013 01:02PM

Buer wrote: »

We competed multiple times on their ball last weekend.

i missed the word "well"....

Buer · 02-07-2013 01:03PM

wonderfullife wrote: »

i missed the word "well"....

We competed well. We disrupted several and stole one but it was called back for an infringement.

fitz · 02-07-2013 01:04PM

I would have thought building phases and trying to get over the gain line with something other than garryowens, grubbers or going down the 12 channel might be a better place to start than kicking more ball...

Rightwing · 02-07-2013 01:04PM

I'd like to see Tuilagi play, the most likely to break the gain line and creates gaps.

irishbucsfan · 02-07-2013 01:05PM

fitz wrote: »

I would have thought building phases and trying to get over the gain line with something other than garryowens, grubbers or going down the 12 channel might be a better place to start than kicking more ball...

Which is what Gatlands teams normally do. And what we did in T1. Which is why I believe we just failed to execute the game plan effectively in possession.

wonderfullife · 02-07-2013 01:13PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Which is what Gatlands teams normally do. And what we did in T1. Which is why I believe we just failed to execute the game plan effectively in possession.

you have to admit the gameplan relies a lot on quick ball though, so what are your alternatives if we're getting slow ball all day?

fitz · 02-07-2013 01:15PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Which is what Gatlands teams normally do. And what we did in T1. Which is why I believe we just failed to execute the game plan effectively in possession.

But he hasn't picked the players to execute that game plan.
You can't vary your point of attack much if you don't have the guys there who are good at punching holes.
Lydiate can tackle all day long, but if you want someone to get over the line, he's not the fella for it, neither is Warburton.
Instead of worrying about which of the pack was going to be used in attack, the Wallabies only really had to worry about Heaslip and MV in terms of carriers.

They didn't have to worry about Davies at all, he won't break the line at 12 like Roberts or Manu.

Rightwing · 02-07-2013 01:21PM

fitz wrote: »

But he hasn't picked the players to execute that game plan.
You can't vary your point of attack much if you don't have the guys there who are good at punching holes.
Lydiate can tackle all day long, but if you want someone to get over the line, he's not the fella for it, neither is Warburton.
Instead of worrying about which of the pack was going to be used in attack, the Wallabies only really had to worry about Heaslip and MV in terms of carriers.

They didn't have to worry about Davies at all, he won't break the line at 12 like Roberts or Manu.

I'm not sure Roberts will be able to either. He's been out a while, a big ask now.

irishbucsfan · 02-07-2013 01:21PM

wonderfullife wrote: »

you have to admit the gameplan relies a lot on quick ball though, so what are your alternatives if we're getting slow ball all day?

It doesn't rely on quick ball so much though. The speed his teams go through the average phase would be less than most.

But even a half decent team with a decent pack and 9 can manufacture quick ball every other phase if their 9 is smart enough to use his resources. But the Lions weren't doing it. Youngs was just not at the races. Look at how Genia uses his forwards to create quock ball even when Oz are being pushed around up front.

Its not about quick ball at all actually. Its impossible to go through 10+ phases regularly in a game and be reliant on quick ball. Unless you have 8 forwards with the power of Jones, the pace of Croft and the brains of Warburton. The good teams who've managed this never have been reliant on quick ball. Just reliable ball and few turnovers. Why do you think theyre realiant on quick ball?

irishbucsfan · 02-07-2013 01:23PM

fitz wrote: »

But he hasn't picked the players to execute that game plan.
You can't vary your point of attack much if you don't have the guys there who are good at punching holes.
Lydiate can tackle all day long, but if you want someone to get over the line, he's not the fella for it, neither is Warburton.
Instead of worrying about which of the pack was going to be used in attack, the Wallabies only really had to worry about Heaslip and MV in terms of carriers.

They didn't have to worry about Davies at all, he won't break the line at 12 like Roberts or Manu.

Of course the players can execute the game plan. They crossed the gain line 72% of the time in T1

Hippo · 02-07-2013 01:33PM

P.Walnuts wrote: »

Ami I right in thinking he wasn't "cleared" in the second hearing, the officer just found that the original officer didn't make an error in law, and therefore he couldn't reverse the decision?

In a nutshell.

Swiwi. · 02-07-2013 01:40PM

danthefan wrote: »

Totally unfounded internet rumour alert: ten Welsh to start on Saturday. Names not given.

Well you nailed it last week DTF so I'll give your post credence. I'll be counting to 10 when the teams announced tomorrow.

fitz · 02-07-2013 01:42PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Of course the players can execute the game plan. They crossed the gain line 72% of the time in T1

My point is, it's all very predictable for the Aussies. Getting over the gainline that often in T1 didn't really help much. The Wallabie defence had the attack routes pegged. Same in T2. They know what to expect, and from whom.
If Leilifano hadn't gotten injured, or JOC could kick, the series would most likely be lost already. (I know, ifs, buts, maybes). That, to me, is not a sign of a well thought out and executed gameplan.

irishbucsfan · 02-07-2013 01:50PM

fitz wrote: »

My point is, it's all very predictable for the Aussies. Getting over the gainline that often in T1 didn't really help much. The Wallabie defence had the attack routes pegged. Same in T2. They know what to expect, and from whom.
If Leilifano hadn't gotten injured, or JOC could kick, the series would most likely be lost already. (I know, ifs, buts, maybes). That, to me, is not a sign of a well thought out and executed gameplan.

You said it exactly. Ifs, buts, maybes. If the referee had looked after the breakdown properly in T1 we COULD have won by 10 points.

The game plan is fine. Its the correct approach for this series. It's the players execution of it which is poor. And I think that is down to coaching oersonally. I don't think Howley is up to it and I think the half backs are not being directed well enough or being held accountable. I don't rate Howley and I don't think a team he has ever coached has ever produced consistently good performances from its half backs.

I just get wound up a little by this attacking of the game plan when I think its the perfect approach for thos series. Or close to it.

marc96 · 02-07-2013 02:47PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

You said it exactly. Ifs, buts, maybes. If the referee had looked after the breakdown properly in T1 we COULD have won by 10 points.

The game plan is fine. Its the correct approach for this series. It's the players execution of it which is poor. And I think that is down to coaching oersonally. I don't think Howley is up to it and I think the half backs are not being directed well enough or being held accountable. I don't rate Howley and I don't think a team he has ever coached has ever produced consistently good performances from its half backs.

I just get wound up a little by this attacking of the game plan when I think its the perfect approach for thos series. Or close to it.

If oz never missed the 5 kicks in T1 u would have lost by 15points so ur idea of winning by 10 means nothing as u would still have lost:)

I think the lions have been lucky to still be in this.all the talk about game plans but what about Australia's game plan in the first test.....losing 5 players changed their game plan.

LeeroyJones · 02-07-2013 03:15PM

I think I've just realised my biggest pet-hate in rugby chat.

Multiplying the amount of missed penalties one side had by 3, coming up with X and suggesting the opposition should have lost by '"Their actual score" + X'.

Penalties are their to be missed as well as scored, gameplans change when a team is up/down by 3 points, the effing restart is from the 22 as opposed to halfway - and so on and so forth.

/rant over
Wow, I feel fantastic

Otacon · 02-07-2013 03:18PM

Ten Welsh players to start...

A Jones
AW Jones
Lydiate
Faletau
Phillips
North
Roberts
Davies
Cuthbert
Halfpenny

Maybe swap Hibbard for Cuthbert in that list

Rightwing · 02-07-2013 03:22PM

Otacon wrote: »

Ten Welsh players to start...

A Jones
AW Jones
Lydiate
Faletau
Phillips
North
Roberts
Davies
Cuthbert
Halfpenny

Maybe swap Hibbard for Cuthbert in that list

What's the record does anyone know from 1 country? 10 must be pretty close if not it.

Pudsy33 · 02-07-2013 03:35PM

Do people realistically think BOD will be dropped?

Rightwing · 02-07-2013 03:38PM

Pudsy33 wrote: »

Do people realistically think BOD will be dropped?

I wouldn't be overly concerned if he was, a bit like many others, he's offered nothing in attack,

crybaby · 02-07-2013 03:40PM

I don't think he will be dropped as he should be captain on Saturday and he is exactly the type of player the Lions need mentally and physically on the pitch to win the series BUT I wouldn't put it past Gatland.

Lions 2013 Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread

Comments