North vs. South the ultimate Test!

[Teh Mite]

There you go again. Why are you so defensive. I am just suggesting somethiing and you get all tense and abusive!
If the British Lions and the Baaabaas can be given Test match status then so can the Southern Hemisphere team.
The closest match we have seen with the worlds top players was the Baabaas game vs. NZ in 2009 end of year tour. The Baabaas consisted mostly of SA, Oz and a NZ. The players got on well and beat the All Blacks. The point is it would be great to see the strongest NH vs. the strongest SH and with my suggestion this could become a reality!

The Barbarians don't get test status, you ******* idiot.

 

[SavageLez]

Good post,

I did not say that the mid week games must be scrapped. I suggested they play stronger opposition and used the example.
They should at least play against the Stormers (Western Province + Boland amalgamated) not the Western Province Team alone! The Lions are all generally all Test players. I am all for the mid week games just against stronger Franchises!

 

[TRF_Cymro]

SavageLez ... you show no understanding of what the British and Irish Lions are all about. The traditions of the tour ... the traditions of 4 nations uniting together to follow and support one team and also the the mid week fixtures against provincial sides has been a long tradition. Unfortunately its not something that can be done with a SH side. The Lions do so well because they are 4 nations in close proximity ... and can be argued to have a similar culture. Compare that to Arg, Aus, SA and NZ they are not.

Also learn to edit your posts. I think I have told you once before.

 

[SelimNiai]

SavageLez ... you show no understanding of what the British and Irish Lions are all about. The traditions of the tour ... the traditions of 4 nations uniting together to follow and support one team and also the the mid week fixtures against provincial sides has been a long tradition. .

And you'd think a Scot would know about it :lol:

 

[SavageLez]

The Barbarians don't get test status, you ******* idiot.

Unlike in cricket, where both countries must grant Test status for a match to be considered a Test, rugby union requires only one nation to recognise a match as a Test in order for it to be included in Test statistics for that nation. The British and Irish Lions and Pacific Islanders do not represent one specific nation, but are also considered Test teams because they are selected by a group of recognised national unions. Some nations have sometimes granted Test caps for matches against teams such as the invitational Barbarians side; these are included only if the player's nation actually granted a Test cap for a particular match.

see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rugby_union_Test_caps_leaders

Test status can be granted if my suggestion were to be actioned!
I would be very similar to a Brabarian side really!
Come on stop arguing, can you honestly tell me you would rather watch the British Lions gang up against one nation rather than play againt the best SH players in the world incl OZ,SA and NZ?

SavageLez ... you show no understanding of what the British and Irish Lions are all about. The traditions of the tour ... the traditions of 4 nations uniting together to follow and support one team and also the the mid week fixtures against provincial sides has been a long tradition. Unfortunately its not something that can be done with a SH side. The Lions do so well because they are 4 nations in close proximity ... and can be argued to have a similar culture. Compare that to Arg, Aus, SA and NZ they are not.

Also learn to edit your posts. I think I have told you once before.

This is not a spelling contest mate!

 

[TRF_Cymro]

Come on stop arguing, can you honestly tell me you would rather watch the British Lions gang up against one nation rather than play againt the best SH players in the world incl OZ,SA and NZ?

As our residence Scot you know that is a silly question. The British Lions has been in existence 1880 (but got its recognition in 1910) and long may it continue. Its quite apparent that people will continue to watch them.

This is not a spelling contest mate!

No Im asking you politely again to edit your post to stop double posting.

 

[Teh Mite]

What the **** are you talking about? It has to be 2 fully capped teams to count as a test. Otherwise it's a throwaway friendly.

The Lions vs a test side is considered a test. Because the Lions represent 1 country (as of the first tour Britian included Ireland therefore it still counts). That's a British cap and a cap for the opposition. The midweeks games aren't tests.
The PIs vs anyone isn't isn't a test. No caps awarded.
The Barbarians isn't vs anyone isn't a test. No caps awarded.

The Lions is not a team, it's a full tour which originally took rugby to those who normally wouldn't see those players. It's a tradition which is why it actually means something.

Your idea of some SANZAR super-team is a bullshit money spinner. Therefore you are Eddie Griffiths and I claim my £10.

 

[SavageLez]

And you'd think a Scot would know about it :lol:

You are obviously not reading my post. I did not say that the B/ Lions must change a thing. They must still be picked from the same countries. They must still tour as usual! They must still play mid week games (but against stronger franchises as mentioned).

The only difference would be the weekend TEST. It should be against the best SH Nations to make the contest more fair. As mentioned to Bullitt, Would you honestly rather see the B/Lions play one nation rather than the best players from the SH teams.
Even if the B/Lions won a series which has not happened in a long time (1997 SA, I think) it is a hollow victory coz it is the best of 4 nations vs. one.

 

[SelimNiai]

Youareobviously not rading my post. I did not say that the B/ Lions must change a thing. They must still be picked from the same countries. They must still tour as usual! They must still play mid week games (but against stronger franchises as mentioned).

The only difference would be the weekend TEST. It should be against the best SH Nations to make the contest more fair. As mentioned to Bullitt, Would you honestly rather see the B/Lions play one nation rather than the best players from the SH teams.
Even if the B/ Lions won a series which has not happened in a long time (1997 SA, I think) it is a hollow victory coz it is the best of 4 nations vs. one.

I would rather they played 1 nation every 4 years. That is how it's run and that how it is going to run.

Enough said.

 

[Teh Mite]

A scratch team team who've only been together for a month or so winning a series against the team who normally are the World Champions away from home...? Yeah, that''s a hollow victory.... :unsure:

I really cannot help but howl with laughter at this. He is such a convinced idiot! :lol:

 

[SavageLez]

A scratch team team who've only been together for a month or so winning a series against the team who normally are the World Champions away from home...? Yeah, that''s a hollow victory.... :unsure:

I really cannot help but howl with laughter at this. He is such a convinced idiot! :lol:

There you go again, your defense is made up of insults! Keep going.
South Africa won the 1995 Rugby Union World Cup, but were in decline at the time. The inaugural Tri Nations in 1996 had been comfortably won by the All Blacks with South Africa winning only one of the four matches in the tournament. There was also some disarray in the management of the game in South Africa with the resignation of the coach Andre Markgraaff and the World Cup winning captain Francois Pienaar was dropped. Chester Williams, Henni Le Roux and Joel Stransky had all retired.

This was a NEW team in a building phase = Hollow victory!
If the British Lions did not win the series they would have been deemed to be really s....!
In fact, you may have a point. If the British Lions can hardly win a series with the current format there is probably no point in playing even stronger opposition!

CASE CLOSED!

Conclusion: British Lions need to continue to choose the best players from 4 nations in an attempt at beating one of the Tri Nations Test teams in a series.

 

[TRF_Cymro]

There you go again, your defense is made up of insults! Keep going.
South Africa won the 1995 Rugby Union World Cup, but were in decline at the time. The inaugural Tri Nations in 1996 had been comfortably won by the All Blacks with South Africa winning only one of the four matches in the tournament. There was also some disarray in the management of the game in South Africa with the resignation of the coach Andre Markgraaff and the World Cup winning captain Francois Pienaar was dropped. Chester Williams, Henni Le Roux and Joel Stransky had all retired.

This was a NEW team in a building phase = Hollow victory!
If the British Lions did not win the series they would have been deemed to be really s....!

Don't you mean ... Kitch Christie

And no ... the Lions victory was a good one and had they not won ... it would not have been deemed to be as poor as your clouded judgement.

 

[SavageLez]

Don't you mean ... Kitch Christie

No, in March 1996, Christie stepped down from the Springboks due to ill health and was replaced by Andre Markgraaf. Come on!

 

[TRF_Cymro]

No, in March 1996, Christie stepped down from the Springboks due to ill health and was replaced by Andre Markgraaf. Come on!

Markgraaf only lasted till 1997 until replaced by Carel du Plessis. SA only presumed to have come poor because Markgraaf decided to drop Piennar.

 

[Teh Mite]

Ah, that old routine.

"The Lions only beat my beloved South Africa (I'm Scottish, dontcha know) in '97 because they were in decline, becausethey were **** themselves".

Yeah...


EDIT: Anyone noticed this thread has also got onto "come on you lot, tell me how wonderful South Africa are" like every other thread Les starts or posts in. Didn't take long.

 

[SavageLez]

Markgraaf only lasted till 1997 until replaced by Carel du Plessis. SA only presumed to have come poor because Markgraaf decided to drop Piennar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitch_Christie

This reading confirms my statement:
In March 1996, Christie stepped down from the Springboks due to ill health and was replaced by Andre Markgraaf.

MOD: No need for that

 

[Teh Mite]

Wikipedia; That holy grail of all things factual...

 

[SavageLez]

Ah, that old routine.

"The Lions only beat my beloved South Africa (I'm Scottish, dontcha know) in '97 because they were in decline, becausethey were **** themselves".

Yeah...

Read this statement:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_British_Lions_tour_to_South_Africa

" South Africa had won the 1995 Rugby Union World Cup, but were in decline at the time. The inaugural Tri Nations in 1996 had been comfortably won by the All Blacks with South Africa winning only one of the four matches in the tournament. There was also some disarray in the management of the game in South Africa with the resignation of the coach Andre Markgraaff and the acrimonious replacement of the World Cup winning captain Francois Pienaar.

Not making it up!
Not lying!

 

[Teh Mite]

First thing I read was;

This article does not cite any references or sources.

 

[SavageLez]

Let's just leave it at that:

Conclusion - British Lions need to continue to choose the best players from 4 nations in an attempt at beating one of the Tri Nations Test teams in a series.