GATLAND Is the leading Contender for Lions Coach.

[Colombia]

+1. They won the series by virtue of the Aussie missed kick. I struggle to follow the logic regarding Gatland - we are told he's one of the best coaches of all time and have been told in the past that many of the Welsh players are superior to their Six Nations counterparts. How can both be true? If both statements were, surely they would be a much more dominant force in the tournament and for that matter, the Lions would have won a lot more comfortably in Australia.

They're not both true, one is more true than the other. Gatland has had success virtually everywhere he has coached. The Welsh regions...not so much.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Gatland is a decent coach but regards last tour I've to be honest that was the most pathetic Aus team I seen for a big challenge like that. It was more their issues lost it than our efforts won it.

Harsh when you consider that there have only been 5 Lions series wins ever (in a 125 years) and Gatland has coached one of them. Despite not playing a vintage Wallabies team (certainly not in the 2001 class) to put together a team out of the four nations to beat one of the big 3 on their home patch is no mean feat. Peeps forget the Lions are set up to fail.

 

[munstermuffin]

Harsh when you consider that there have only been 5 Lions series wins ever (in a 125 years) and Gatland has coached one of them. Despite not playing a vintage Wallabies team (certainly not in the 2001 class) to put together a team out of the four nations to beat one of the big 3 on their home patch is no mean feat. Peeps forget the Lions are set up to fail.

Harsh maybe but let's be honest that Australia team were poor

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Harsh maybe but let's be honest that Australia team were poor

i will savour it nevertheless especially as Lions wins don't come around often and regardless how poor that Wallabies team was the Lions needed to win after losing the previous 3 series. And I don't expect Lions to win in 2017.

 

[McTallshort]

Harsh maybe but let's be honest that Australia team were poor

So were the SA team in 1997, the Aussie team of 89 were the last decent international team the Lions beat but given whats against a Lions team when touring these places its hardly suprising.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

The Lions should be scrapped. They'll never beat a good team and it only hinders the Lion's nations. It's a good spectacle and all but if it's to be kept a Baabaa's structure would be better.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

The Lions should be scrapped. They'll never beat a good team and it only hinders the Lion's nations. It's a good spectacle and all but if it's to be kept a Baabaa's structure would be better.

So by scrapping the Lions, the four separate nations' win ratio v SA, Aus, and NZ will suddenly improve dramatically? Come on, apart from a hangover in the November internationals following a Lions tour, it does nothing of the sort. I think in future there's an argument, after 2019 when the current contract ends to also include a 3 test series v Argentina, with warm up games v US and Canada.

So we should down grade the Lions ethos to the Baabaas, which let's be honest is just an excuse for a squad of players from different nations to get lashed and then play the odd game of rugby which no-one cares if they win or lose.

Just arguing that Lions is so special because it is every four years and is the only team sport where England, Wales, Scotland and a "unified" Ireland play in one team; under one shirt. There is such a history of "dislike" between the nations; mostly due to England I admit, that to put that aside once every four years is worth preserving, imo.

 

[munstermuffin]

So were the SA team in 1997, the Aussie team of 89 were the last decent international team the Lions beat but given whats against a Lions team when touring these places its hardly suprising.

Difference was it wasn't fully pro back then so ethos were different to now in last 3/4 tours.
If ye think differently I fully respect that and understand your views. Just my own belief is the Lions concept has changed. With so many Barbarian games and the actual tours running too long it's just washed up a bit.

 

[munstermuffin]

So by scrapping the Lions, the four separate nations' win ratio v SA, Aus, and NZ will suddenly improve dramatically? Come on, apart from a hangover in the November internationals following a Lions tour, it does nothing of the sort. I think in future there's an argument, after 2019 when the current contract ends to also include a 3 test series v Argentina, with warm up games v US and Canada.

So we should down grade the Lions ethos to the Baabaas, which let's be honest is just an excuse for a squad of players from different nations to get lashed and then play the odd game of rugby which no-one cares if they win or lose.

Just arguing that Lions is so special because it is every four years and is the only team sport where England, Wales, Scotland and a "unified" Ireland play in one team; under one shirt. There is such a history of "dislike" between the nations; mostly due to England I admit, that to put that aside once every four years is worth preserving, imo.

Alpha makes a good point though.
On comment about prospects of beating the 4. A study shows a lot of injuries come from Lions tours that run medium to long term. Add that with that summer the nations get another window of preparation and it would improve it slightly

 

[Saint4805]

Injuries to key players are inevitable due to the gruelling schedule and because the Lions are playing club sides that are extremely charged up given it's a once in lifetime opportunity for many of them. The schedule gives players a chance to gel and work on combinations but injuries are inevitable which can make a difference when coming up against a relatively fresh test side.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

So by scrapping the Lions, the four separate nations' win ratio v SA, Aus, and NZ will suddenly improve dramatically? Come on, apart from a hangover in the November internationals following a Lions tour, it does nothing of the sort. I think in future there's an argument, after 2019 when the current contract ends to also include a 3 test series v Argentina, with warm up games v US and Canada.

It would probably increase consistently over time, forgetting all that ethos and camaraderie bull**** all the Tour really brings is injuries, Cian Healy hasn't been the same after being injured in a game against some Aussie club side playing for a supposedly super-international side, and disrupts the national sides themselves. Two years out from a World Cup should be prime time for building your team and testing them against the best, not losing them to a tour that is four weeks too long and causes players to be over played months down the line.

Also, if a tour to Argentina is organised NH sides should just leave the World Cup altogether, there's already a lack of ambition shown by thinking we have to team up to beat the other teams, we should be trying to get better than Argentina as nations rather than collectively worse.

So we should down grade the Lions ethos to the Baabaas, which let's be honest is just an excuse for a squad of players from different nations to get lashed and then play the odd game of rugby which no-one cares if they win or lose.

Wouldn't be the worst thing, both the teams are dated and don't belong in the modern game. Traditionalists will want to keep it in some form though so leave it like this.

Just arguing that Lions is so special because it is every four years and is the only team sport where England, Wales, Scotland and a "unified" Ireland play in one team; under one shirt. There is such a history of "dislike" between the nations; mostly due to England I admit, that to put that aside once every four years is worth preserving, imo.

Fair enough but I really don't see the need when the negatives outweigh the positives. It's a good tour and can be entertaining and it was certainly needed in the past but now it's just out of place. The majority of Ireland is no longer British, like it was when the tour was formed, and has no need or reason to represent a team along with Britain other than the history of this tour and now GBNI can play sevens in the Olympics together so you have those players representing four nations who do have a reason to play together. I think the history of it has to be thrown aside and let everyone realise what's best for them as their own nation, this tour isn't what they'd come up with.

Anyway, I posted that first comment after a few pints, not something I usually like putting up here because it's a very unpopular opinion so a I don't particularly want to say anymore. I don't value the history and ethos of the tour so unless there was a convincing argument that the tour is good for the Irish rugby team I won't agree.

 

[munstermuffin]

Injuries to key players are inevitable due to the gruelling schedule and because the Lions are playing club sides that are extremely charged up given it's a once in lifetime opportunity for many of them. The schedule gives players a chance to gel and work on combinations but injuries are inevitable which can make a difference when coming up against a relatively fresh test side.

Add in some of those club guys see it as a way to make shop window for European clubs or Super Rugby

 

[RedruthRFC]

So were the SA team in 1997, the Aussie team of 89 were the last decent international team the Lions beat but given whats against a Lions team when touring these places its hardly suprising.

Are you sure that's true? It's going back lots of years and in those days I didn't have that much knowledge of SH rugby (arguably this is still the case, but I like to think to a slightly lesser extent), so I stand to be corrected. However, the SA side the Lions beat still contained a decent portion of the 1995 RWC winning side, were the new players brought in notably weaker? The side that the Lions beat would go on to win their first ever Tri-Nations tournament the year afterwards and would go on to record a (then) world record breaking winning streak. Was the 1998 side notably stronger than the 1997 one?

 

[Bada-Bing!]

It would probably increase consistently over time, forgetting all that ethos and camaraderie bull**** all the Tour really brings is injuries, Cian Healy hasn't been the same after being injured in a game against some Aussie club side playing for a supposedly super-international side, and disrupts the national sides themselves. Two years out from a World Cup should be prime time for building your team and testing them against the best, not losing them to a tour that is four weeks too long and causes players to be over played months down the line.

Also, if a tour to Argentina is organised NH sides should just leave the World Cup altogether, there's already a lack of ambition shown by thinking we have to team up to beat the other teams, we should be trying to get better than Argentina as nations rather than collectively worse.

Cian Healy went over on his ankle and ruptured ligaments. That could have happened in any game, for Leinster or Ireland. Sounds like because you dislike the concept of the Lions you blame his string of injuries on first getting injured on the lions tour. But he has suffered other injuries since that have been unrelated and Jack McGrath has since been preferred.

i think Argentina are the coming force in international rugby. 2 semis in the last 3 RWCs; they will only get better now their players are now playing in Super rugby and the Rugby Championship. Ireland have played in 8 RWCs and have still not reached one semi.

Wouldn't be the worst thing, both the teams are dated and don't belong in the modern game. Traditionalists will want to keep it in some form though so leave it like this.

There is nothing underpinning the Baa-Baas, apart from tradition. Whereas the Lions is the pinnacle for any player from the 4 home nations. You only have to look at how it has elevated POC, BOD (both captains of the Lions, albeit unsuccessful) and Mike Gibson, which they would have done had no Lions existed and they had just made their name with Ireland.

Fair enough but I really don't see the need when the negatives outweigh the positives. It's a good tour and can be entertaining and it was certainly needed in the past but now it's just out of place. The majority of Ireland is no longer British, like it was when the tour was formed, and has no need or reason to represent a team along with Britain other than the history of this tour and now GBNI can play sevens in the Olympics together so you have those players representing four nations who do have a reason to play together. I think the history of it has to be thrown aside and let everyone realise what's best for them as their own nation, this tour isn't what they'd come up with.

Again, ask POC, BOD, Mike Gibson 3 of Ireland's greatest players where they place their achievements with the Lions and what playing for the shirt meant for them. You only had to look at the devastation BOD and the fallout in Ireland in 2013, when Gatland dropped him in the 3rd test to know that. For any English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish player to be selected is an honour and one of the pinnacles in the sport alongside playing in the RWC. I don't see how that notion/prestige is outdated.

Anyway, I posted that first comment after a few pints, not something I usually like putting up here because it's a very unpopular opinion so a I don't particularly want to say anymore. I don't value the history and ethos of the tour so unless there was a convincing argument that the tour is good for the Irish rugby team I won't agree.

Your loss then, you only have to look at the build up even this far out and people already getting excited about it and thinking and selecting their team to play in the 1st test. It only happens once every 4 years, which is plenty. The rest of the 3 years are taken up by club rugby, 6Ns, June/November tours and then the RWC. A Global calendar is certainly needed and if anything club rugby should be trimmed slightly (too many play offs, which aren't needed). But for me and I think the vast majority there is still room for the Lions. As long as there is interest and it makes money and the players value the concept it will continue.

 

[McTallshort]

Are you sure that's true? It's going back lots of years and in those days I didn't have that much knowledge of SH rugby (arguably this is still the case, but I like to think to a slightly lesser extent), so I stand to be corrected. However, the SA side the Lions beat still contained a decent portion of the 1995 RWC winning side, were the new players brought in notably weaker? The side that the Lions beat would go on to win their first ever Tri-Nations tournament the year afterwards and would go on to record a (then) world record breaking winning streak. Was the 1998 side notably stronger than the 1997 one?

They then lost to NZ in a home series in 96 before losing to Lions a year later. It was very much a team in transition they started the first 2 tests without a reconised goal kicker, they were dirty and lacked discipline which the ginger welshman happily punished them for.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Cian Healy went over on his ankle and ruptured ligaments. That could have happened in any game, for Leinster or Ireland. Sounds like because you dislike the concept of the Lions you blame his string of injuries on first getting injured on the lions tour. But he has suffered other injuries since that have been unrelated and Jack McGrath has since been preferred.

A needless injury in a needless match, it often takes one to lead to a string of injuries related to it or not. You see it in a lot of players who have gone a long period of their career without a serious injury especially front five players who lose strength while they're out.

i think Argentina are the coming force in international rugby. 2 semis in the last 3 RWCs; they will only get better now their players are now playing in Super rugby and the Rugby Championship. Ireland have played in 8 RWCs and have still not reached one semi.

Meh, I think they have had two great teams in world cups and have done the very best they could with it, I can't see them passing the best six nations sides just yet, which they haven't, one good World Cup does not show that. Ireland are chokers in the World Cup, Argentina have never won in Dublin and have a woeful record against us in 1st XV test matches even if they are scarce. I'm also convinced Ireland would have had a semi final last year if Sexton, O'Connell and Healy were fully fit, had they not had very little rest time between a gruelling Lions tour two years earlier and the World Cup who knows if their bodies would have broken down?
Every NH rugby fan is claiming that we need less rugby in a season yet support a pointless circle jerk tour, it's bizarre.

There is nothing underpinning the Baa-Baas, apart from tradition. Whereas the Lions is the pinnacle for any player from the 4 home nations. You only have to look at how it has elevated POC, BOD (both captains of the Lions, albeit unsuccessful) and Mike Gibson, which they would have done had no Lions existed and they had just made their name with Ireland.



Again, ask POC, BOD, Mike Gibson 3 of Ireland's greatest players where they place their achievements with the Lions and what playing for the shirt meant for them. You only had to look at the devastation BOD and the fallout in Ireland in 2013, when Gatland dropped him in the 3rd test to know that. For any English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish player to be selected is an honour and one of the pinnacles in the sport alongside playing in the RWC. I don't see how that notion/prestige is outdated.

I'd say POC and BOD would consider them lesser achievements than their grand slam, 1/2 championship(s) on top of that, 3 more triple crowns, 2/3 Heineken cups and pro 12 ***les. At the end of the day being Lion's captain is the objective decision of one man, it's made a big deal because of all the historical bull**** surrounding it, trophies are better, you go on the tear after winning trophies, you go to a press conference and exchange pleasantries when you're named Lion's captain...

The BOD thing is kind of what led me to first think this, the amount of people in this country who were happier than a pig in **** watching the Lions claiming to want them to lose after BOD was dropped was incredible. It showed me both the bad side of the bandwagon culture in Ireland but also that the Lion's winning or losing doesn't matter a ****e to fans. It should either be made the International side that competes on the world stage for the four nations, which would obviously be pathetic, or scrapped.
Gibson's different, he was a different era, my claim is that the Lions have no place in the squad now.

Your loss then, you only have to look at the build up even this far out and people already getting excited about it and thinking and selecting their team to play in the 1st test. It only happens once every 4 years, which is plenty. The rest of the 3 years are taken up by club rugby, 6Ns, June/November tours and then the RWC. A Global calendar is certainly needed and if anything club rugby should be trimmed slightly (too many play offs, which aren't needed). But for me and I think the vast majority there is still room for the Lions. As long as there is interest and it makes money and the players value the concept it will continue.

I'll still watch it, hope as few Irish players as possible get picked and enjoy some of the banter that comes from it but begrudge the fact that our best players who are integral to our challenge in the next 6 nations, which France unsurprisingly win when competent, and World Cup are on a 6 week tour playing at least 80 minutes of professional rugby spread across two games a week.

I do really hope Ireland v NZ in Chicago is a huge financial success because of it, if the unions realise that they'd be better off hosting test matches or four team competitions like you see in pre season soccer in North America and make more money every four years or so the Lions will be no more. As I said though, it's an unpopular opinion because we all love the folklore that goes with it.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Meh, I think they have had two great teams in world cups and have done the very best they could with it, I can't see them passing the best six nations sides just yet, which they haven't, one good World Cup does not show that.

Argentina were also superb and got to the semis of the 2007 RWC. I just think with their participation in the Super Rugby and RC, they are only going to get better.

Ireland are chokers in the World Cup, Argentina have never won in Dublin and have a woeful record against us in 1st XV test matches even if they are scarce. I'm also convinced Ireland would have had a semi final last year if Sexton, O'Connell and Healy were fully fit, had they not had very little rest time between a gruelling Lions tour two years earlier and the World Cup who knows if their bodies would have broken down?
Every NH rugby fan is claiming that we need less rugby in a season yet support a pointless circle jerk tour, it's bizarre.

I don't disagree with you that Ireland and for that matter Wales are chokers are the RWC. I disagree that had Sexton, POC and Healy been fit Ireland would have gone onto the semi final. I think Argentina totally exposed Schmidt's limited game plan and how Ireland play so narrow. It would have been closer on the scoreboard, but Argentina totally outplayed Ireland that day. I also can't see how you can blame the Lions for POC or Sexton's injuries. POC's injury was horrific - having his hamstring torn when being cleared out at a ruck and Sexton - going off after late tackle by Picamoles.

I'd say POC and BOD would consider them lesser achievements than their grand slam, 1/2 championship(s) on top of that, 3 more triple crowns, 2/3 Heineken cups and pro 12 ***les. At the end of the day being Lion's captain is the objective decision of one man, it's made a big deal because of all the historical bull**** surrounding it, trophies are better, you go on the tear after winning trophies, you go to a press conference and exchange pleasantries when you're named Lion's captain...

The BOD thing is kind of what led me to first think this, the amount of people in this country who were happier than a pig in **** watching the Lions claiming to want them to lose after BOD was dropped was incredible. It showed me both the bad side of the bandwagon culture in Ireland but also that the Lion's winning or losing doesn't matter a ****e to fans. It should either be made the International side that competes on the world stage for the four nations, which would obviously be pathetic, or scrapped.
Gibson's different, he was a different era, my claim is that the Lions have no place in the squad now.

I think you make a good point here with winning trophies. But I still regard the Lions as right up there with the RWC, as the pinnacle for any Home nations player; to be chosen for the Lions is to be chosen as the very best of the Britain and Ireland. To be part of something greater than playing even for your own individual country. That for me is why it still has a place in the sport in the modern game. It's also the challenge more than anything - four nations who knock 7 bells out of each other and with such an intense rivalries with each other have to put this aside once every four years to form a team to beat one of the SH sides on their home turf. That for me epitomises the very best of what Rugby Union stands for.

I'll still watch it, hope as few Irish players as possible get picked and enjoy some of the banter that comes from it but begrudge the fact that our best players who are integral to our challenge in the next 6 nations, which France unsurprisingly win when competent, and World Cup are on a 6 week tour playing at least 80 minutes of professional rugby spread across two games a week.

I'll never forget watching the last Lions test at 11am in a bar in Leicester Square - how many fans from the four nations, as well as Aussies, Kiwis and Saffers who turned out to watch the game. The singing of all four nations anthems as the Lions won. It sent chills down the back of my spine and reminded me why it is so special and worth persevering with in the modern game. For me the International game trumps the club game and if anything needs to be trimmed for the sake of the international game it is the club game.

You made the point about France, but that is exactly why I hope the international game takes precedence and there is a place for the Lions, because France have sacrificed their national team for the sake of the top 14. They have no equivalent of the Lions and yet they have been terrible in the last four years. I just fear that all that will happen if you take away something as special as the Lions once every four years, clubs will demand seasons last that bit longer at the expense of the international team.

Anyway, I think we both set out our viewpoints and they differ widely. But the above is why I think the Lions is worth persevering with and for me the positives greatly outweigh the negatives.