Warm Up Match 2: Blues v British & Irish Lions (Auckland)

[The Jones Boy]

One big point I'd make, is that I keep hearing how only the tests matter. I just think that's not true; if we go into the first test on a string of defeats, we're lost. Winning mentality is so important, and we have to show that the Blues defeat was a blip. That's why I would treat this next game as a proper test match.

This is not a regular feature, this is once every twelve years with a scratch team and a scratch management team.
Results can be arbitrary before the tests start.
Wins help to build camaraderie and belief but in the Lions context, especially in NZ, you take what you can get, if it's only positive performances then you work with it and let the professionalism allow the results to be a lesser issue.
There were some good Lions players performances out there tonight, particularly in the pack.
The Lions are a work in progress, they have boatloads of talent on board, they must adhere to whatever the coach wants and try their best to deliver... and they may not hit their straps until as late as the 2nd test.
I believe the Lions will be a much better attacking unit if Farrell is in the 10 shirt AND getting quick ball from the halfback.
His game management skillset looks way ahead of Sexton at this time.
It's still early days but Farrell is comfortably in line for the 10 shirt with Sexton as cover.

 

[Penne Rara]

As it looks now, it might be 2005 again. SBW destroyed the Lions, what a player!

Hopefully we still haven't seen Carter's reincarnation today. He's still to come and I'm sure his name begins by a B.

 

[Caitlyn Jenner]

Just sticking one in for my lad But I do think he's been good this season, which has kept Nanai on the bench, who is also a great player/prospect. SBW coming back in with Ioane going back to wing kind of screwed him and Duffie and Collins form. Collins at fullback this season has been decision maker than Nanai IMO, his running game is superb. I'd like to see him go to the Chiefs with McKenzie moving into 10, or even just putting Nanai on the wing at the Chiefs, I think he'd fit in really well there.

Completely agree, the Chiefs would be absolutely perfect for him. I really hope that happens.

 

[Scoi]

I'm a little worried that losing 8 or 9 games on this tour could spell the end for the lions . Sponsors want competitiveness . Interest will cool very fast if they don't get that in the same way it has for Barbarians rugby

Better a bunch of tight games and lose a few than putting a ton on the likes of Manawatu, the schedule had one warm up game then every game will be a challenge. Probably a good strategy after the farce of the last SA tour where it was warm ups against part timers.

It's probably going to end up the worst win percent of recent tours but the best chance of winning the series.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Haven't seen it yet, but doesn't sound great.

Winning's a habit and it's one the Lions had better get into sharpish or they're toast. Quite apart from how good the Kiwis are, the organisation in the modern game means that it's getting harder and harder for scratch sides like the Baa Baas or even the Lions to overcome the cohesion of teams that have been playing together for a long time.

Especially when those teams are Kiwi teams. The Barbarians still may have value through unusual rugby tactics but the Lions try to go out and play like a national side. The more we hear about jet lag, lack of time together etc, the more the Lions seem like a poor idea. If these problems are preventing them from being able to compete then it's a waste of time. NZ really took the **** with the scheduling though. No rest from the end of the domestic season, no time to practice together, no time to acclimatise to a time zone 12 hours out of sync with you own and the 2 games a week through the whole tour, it's ridiculous. Don't think they would have won if things were different but from a player welfare point of view it is going to lead to fatigue and injury.

 

[Ground We Won]

Has anyone thrashed the Blues this year? Like Super Rugby teams generally get thrashed in NZ? I suggest not.

So, the lions barely got away with a win against a random number of nzers who happened to be playing across the stadium last week and now lost to the worst

Maybe not the brumbies, but i'm probably closer to Stormer2010's position than yours. I'd say the Sharks are clearly above the blues right now and i'd say the Stormers and the Blues are about par.

In laymen terms, the Blues are nothing more than a mid tier team in Super Rugby. They'd get a play off spot if they were in Australia's Group, but they'd be dismantlement after that.

It's interesting reading peoples opinions from different countries. If I didn't frequent these forums, I'd have no idea people actually thought the Blues were that bad. I'm surprised people think the Stormers are genuinely better than them after that farcical match and receiving huge thrashings in New Zealand.

I'm really not a huge fan of them at all, often very critical, but they're still a very good side on their day, which they have shown in all the NZ derbies this season. I think they have proven themselves far more than the Stormers and Sharks who I don't think would beat this Lions team.

 

[Caitlyn Jenner]

Better a bunch of tight games and lose a few than putting a ton on the likes of Manawatu, the schedule had one warm up game then every game will be a challenge. Probably a good strategy after the farce of the last SA tour where it was warm ups against part timers.

It's probably going to end up the worst win percent of recent tours but the best chance of winning the series.

Well maybe not the best chance of winning the series, but it will make for a very competitive and entertaining tour as a whole, which I am happy about.

 

[ALJ]

Well if we're gonna lose then better it to a score like that - great try!

Blues played well I thought, classic NZ side - occasionally ropey at the set piece but defend with their lives and incredibly dangerous with ball in hand.

As for the Lions, clearly not ideal to lose the match but we're still putting it together and there are a few who haven't been seen yet who should make a difference (certainly in terms of the stodgy attack).

The following is all IMHO based on seeing the game live - just done for the sake of debate really.

Putting their best foot forward:

• Front five (7 them including the prop subs - set piece dominance and worked hard in open play. Personally don't blame Marler for the penalty at the end, another ref on another day could well have let it go),
• Tipuric (would like to see him turning ball over but worked hard in conditions that didn't suit him),
• Webb (Lively and tackled well. Yes his kicking was aimless at times but clearly a tactic and he made good distance with a few defensive kicks - though quite why we are giving NZ sides broken field ball instead of getting it off the pitch is beyond me),
• Henshaw (ran hard and straight),
• Halfpenny (lacks Hogg's attacking skills but really got involved and his kicking was flawless),
• O'Mahony (thought he was prominent when he came on).

Maintaining station:

• Stander (Did OK but seems a marked man and if he's not going to make ground with the ball in hand then I'm not sure why you'd select him over someone like Moriarty),
• Biggar (you know what you're getting and that's what we got),
• Payne and Daly (nothing great, nothing terrible),
• Sexton (almost in the bottom section but given he's in poor form, nothing has really changed. Passing was ok, kicking was poor),
• Laidlaw (hardly any game time, he is what he is),
• Henderson (did he get on the pitch?).

In reverse:

• Haskell (just can't seem to recover his form - shouldn't be on tour imho),
• Nowell (I know people love his work rate and I get that but he is just not quick enough - a problem that was cruelly exposed today. He also seemed to be constantly caught defending the inside man - it happened so often I can't help wonder if it's a tactical thing, although it didn't seem to happen on the other wing),
• Rory Best (WTF? I know these things happen but when the pressure was on...),
• Williams (bit harsh maybe but he's got to be judging those high balls better and didn't offer much else).

 

[General Melchett]

Is the 23 to face Crusaders named tomorrow?

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I don't think he was bad on attack, he had more of crack than I've seen in a long time and not a single other player did anything in attack.

I was talking more about his counter attacking from 15,
The whole attack as a unit was dire so I'm not holding it against him

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

It's interesting reading peoples opinions from different countries. If I didn't frequent these forums, I'd have no idea people actually thought the Blues were that bad. I'm surprised people think the Stormers are genuinely better than them after that farcical match and receiving huge thrashings in New Zealand.

I'm really not a huge fan of them at all, often very critical, but they're still a very good side on their day, which they have shown in all the NZ derbies this season. I think they have proven themselves far more than the Stormers and Sharks who I don't think would beat this Lions team.

I believe Cruz said 'on a par' with and I said 'possibly even'. No one said the Stormers are out and out a better side. I do believe the Sharks are slightly ahead of the Blues though.

As for this season the Stormers have won the Blues themselves and one other NZ side which the Blues have yet to manage in more opportunities. My hope is we will come good again in the play-offs as we have been running on empty in the backs and have been going without all of 3 test centers, our 1st choice winger and have had to result to playing Lleyds at 10 with both Du Preez and Du Plessis unavailable at 10 while Kolbe and Vermaak have also been in and out of the injury lists.

 

[Maverick1987]

Especially when those teams are Kiwi teams. The Barbarians still may have value through unusual rugby tactics but the Lions try to go out and play like a national side. The more we hear about jet lag, lack of time together etc, the more the Lions seem like a poor idea. If these problems are preventing them from being able to compete then it's a waste of time. NZ really took the **** with the scheduling though. No rest from the end of the domestic season, no time to practice together, no time to acclimatise to a time zone 12 hours out of sync with you own and the 2 games a week through the whole tour, it's ridiculous. Don't think they would have won if things were different but from a player welfare point of view it is going to lead to fatigue and injury.

This is bang on . There was no need for it to be immediately after the season finished . Could have been in a couple of weeks the results wouldn't have changed . Just gives Premiership Rugby more ammo against the Lions tour

 

[ianw16]

This is bang on . There was no need for it to be immediately after the season finished . Could have been in a couple of weeks the results wouldn't have changed . Just gives Premiership Rugby more ammo against the Lions tour

I very much doubt that the NZRU gave them a schedule and said "take it or leave it"!!! The PTB in the Lions hierarchy would have had a say on the scheduling. They'd have had the itinerary for some time beforehand. IIRC there were similar problems about timing when England toured NZ a couple of seasons ago. Don't forget that the NZ super rugby sides have to fit this around their tournament schedules, as well. Just a thought, but maybe the English club sides might want to trim their season a little. It does tend to drag on a bit

ETA: It has always seemed daft to me to have a 22 game season, and then have play offs! You can understand it in Super Rugby, with the conference system, and 5 different countries involved.....but 22 games, and then a play off? I realise that it all comes down to money. But who is pushing that? The clubs. So they can hardly complain.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

I very much doubt that the NZRU gave them a schedule and said "take it or leave it"!!! The PTB in the Lions hierarchy would have had a say on the scheduling. They'd have had the itinerary for some time beforehand. IIRC there were similar problems about timing when England toured NZ a couple of seasons ago. Don't forget that the NZ super rugby sides have to fit this around their tournament schedules, as well. Just a thought, but maybe the English club sides might want to trim their season a little. It does tend to drag on a bit

ETA: It has always seemed daft to me to have a 22 game season, and then have play offs! You can understand it in Super Rugby, with the conference system, and 5 different countries involved.....but 22 games, and then a play off? I realise that it all comes down to money. But who is pushing that? The clubs. So they can hardly complain.

The playoffs make up for the 6 or so games that players can't play due to internationals, intense three test tours are already too much. Either an international window has to be cut or the regular domestic season cut by 4-6 games for the players to be playing a manageable amount of rugby and the Lions is obviously too much rugby.

 

[The Jones Boy]

Can we have a thread for the Crusaders game please????

 

[ianw16]

The playoffs make up for the 6 or so games that players can't play due to internationals, intense three test tours are already too much. Either an international window has to be cut or the regular domestic season cut by 4-6 games for the players to be playing a manageable amount of rugby and the Lions is obviously too much rugby.

Oh I'd definitely agree that there is too much rugby. However, it seems that it's the NH that have these problems, for the most part. And that is down to overly long domestic competitions. In NZ, as you no doubt know, SR starts, and then takes a break when the June internationals occur. It restarts and finishes before the RC. The RC happens, and then the chaps have a decent break before the end of season tours. It is pretty well streamlined south of the equator. Even then, I still think the SH guys are playing too much. However, they tend to get more breaks due to the influence of the governing body over the SR teams. For the NH guys, it is ridiculous. Hopefully, axing a few SR teams will help the SH players next season. On the other hand, I imagine that the club owners in the NH are looking for even more games to squeeze in!

 

[Which Tyler]

The playoffs make up for the 6 or so games that players can't play due to internationals, intense three test tours are already too much. Either an international window has to be cut or the regular domestic season cut by 4-6 games for the players to be playing a manageable amount of rugby and the Lions is obviously too much rugby.

 

[Jockstap]

Need to keep calm, this was this teams first time playing together, we'll lose against the crusaders on Saturday as it will be another new team but after that Gatland can start picking his best team and hopefully they can play a few more games together before they get annihilated in the first test.

 

[valley commando]

Well if we're gonna lose then better it to a score like that - great try!

Blues played well I thought, classic NZ side - occasionally ropey at the set piece but defend with their lives and incredibly dangerous with ball in hand.

As for the Lions, clearly not ideal to lose the match but we're still putting it together and there are a few who haven't been seen yet who should make a difference (certainly in terms of the stodgy attack).

The following is all IMHO based on seeing the game live - just done for the sake of debate really.

Putting their best foot forward:

• Front five (7 them including the prop subs - set piece dominance and worked hard in open play. Personally don't blame Marler for the penalty at the end, another ref on another day could well have let it go),
• Tipuric (would like to see him turning ball over but worked hard in conditions that didn't suit him),
• Webb (Lively and tackled well. Yes his kicking was aimless at times but clearly a tactic and he made good distance with a few defensive kicks - though quite why we are giving NZ sides broken field ball instead of getting it off the pitch is beyond me),
• Henshaw (ran hard and straight),
• Halfpenny (lacks Hogg's attacking skills but really got involved and his kicking was flawless),
• O'Mahony (thought he was prominent when he came on).

Maintaining station:

• Stander (Did OK but seems a marked man and if he's not going to make ground with the ball in hand then I'm not sure why you'd select him over someone like Moriarty),
• Biggar (you know what you're getting and that's what we got),
• Payne and Daly (nothing great, nothing terrible),
• Sexton (almost in the bottom section but given he's in poor form, nothing has really changed. Passing was ok, kicking was poor),
• Laidlaw (hardly any game time, he is what he is),
• Henderson (did he get on the pitch?).

In reverse:

• Haskell (just can't seem to recover his form - shouldn't be on tour imho),
• Nowell (I know people love his work rate and I get that but he is just not quick enough - a problem that was cruelly exposed today. He also seemed to be constantly caught defending the inside man - it happened so often I can't help wonder if it's a tactical thing, although it didn't seem to happen on the other wing),
• Rory Best (WTF? I know these things happen but when the pressure was on...),
• Williams (bit harsh maybe but he's got to be judging those high balls better and didn't offer much else).

Excellent match analysis, I couldn't agree more

 

[The blunderbus]

Ive a few problems with this tour. The tour is really only a revenue generating task. The lions are only a red version of the barbarians. The next thing is the selection of managers and squad. Theach manager is an awful appointment and this is reflected in his squad selection his bias I'd terrible. Some very poor picks and nonew more so than the captain. Sam is not even the national captain and he has had a very poor season. The whole thing is a dead duck. It is taking valuable recovery time out of the calendar for Northern hemisphere player's.