Where Can the Lions Find Competitive Games?

[PutPutPut]

This year's tour to Australia, and to a far lesser extent the previous on to South Africa, have presented the Lions with few enough competitive games leading up to the test series, causing serious questions to be asked as to whether the Lions will go into their games against Australia under cooked. Australia, moreso than any of the other SANZAR nations suffer from a lack of depth so of course this was to be expected, but for the Lions it's a big issue. While I doubt it's one they'll encounter in four years when they go to New Zealand in 4 years, it must be addressed when planning future tours.

So where can the Lions look to get more competitive warm up games? One option might be France, where there are a full 14 pro sides just finishing up their seasons. While the 4 semi finalists would be unavailable, there's no argument that the like of Montpellier and Biarritz would be able to provide more still competition than the Combined Countries or Barbarians sides we've seen, particularly at home. Other options could be the two North American sides, who have proven themselves tricky enough for the depleted home nations recently. Samoa would also certainly be a physical workout for any Lions side.

Do the Lions need to start looking elsewhere for a better preparation? Or, if Australia cannot provide suitable warm up opposition should their automatic right to the lucrative tour come into question?

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Ben Kay has said, on twitter I think, that we should play Samoa, Fiji and Tonga.
Would be good, imo, but they'd have to be staged in the host country and the host country might not be as keen as I presume they'd rather their own sides play (and I presume they'd get more cash from them, as the other countries would want a cut?)

 

[Tony Manx]

One option might be France, where there are a full 14 pro sides just finishing up their seasons. While the 4 semi finalists would be unavailable, there's no argument that the like of Montpellier and Biarritz would be able to provide more still competition than the Combined Countries or Barbarians sides we've seen, particularly at home.

HaHaHaHa Biarritz..............they are not even giving most sides in the Top 14 a decent challenge.......Montpeillier will be upset to be thougt of as not being semi final potential......

Look, the Lions will have had 5 games in run up to 1st test whereas when did the wallabies last play a competitive side? Which one would you prefer to be in..............

 

[PutPutPut]

HaHaHaHa Biarritz..............they are not even giving most sides in the Top 14 a decent challenge.......Montpeillier will be upset to be thougt of as not being semi final potential......

Look, the Lions will have had 5 games in run up to 1st test whereas when did the wallabies last play a competitive side? Which one would you prefer to be in..............

The Wallabies have the advantage of having played before together of course, which is the main issue. How do you figure out what combinations work and get your team to gel if you're playing against vastly inferior opposition, including amateurs?

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

HaHaHaHa Biarritz..............they are not even giving most sides in the Top 14 a decent challenge.......Montpeillier will be upset to be thougt of as not being semi final potential......

Look, the Lions will have had 5 games in run up to 1st test whereas when did the wallabies last play a competitive side? Which one would you prefer to be in..............

The problem isn't lack of match fitness, it's lack of combinations.

 

[Tony Manx]

The problem isn't lack of match fitness, it's lack of combinations.

Greenwood has just been saying that the reasons why they take players off if there is even a slight doubt and have rushed to get replacements as fast as possible is that, he has been told by the players, they want a full compliment of scrummagers and are bashing hell out of each other in private training and doing that work there through not wanting to show their hand....

 

[PutPutPut]

Greenwood has just been saying that the reasons why they take players off if there is even a slight doubt and have rushed to get replacements as fast as possible is that, he has been told by the players, they want a full compliment of scrummagers and are bashing hell out of each other in private training and doing that work there through not wanting to show their hand....

As I'm sure you know, you can do all the training you like, but you're still never going to approach real match intensity, no matter how hard you go at it. The Lions' training sessions may indeed be more intense than the games they've had so far, but that's a testament to the utter weakness of the opposition supplied (The Reds aside) rather than to the strength of their training. The fact is that due to the uncompetitiveness of the sides they've had to face on the tour thus far, the Lions risk going into the test series severely undercooked.

 

[squid]

The lions shouldn't play combined country. They are an amateur team thrown together after two training sessions. The force should have played their first choice players. The baa baas should have selected better players. The reds almost rolled the lions and the tahs and brumbies will be competitive, maybe even the rebels. How much preparation do you want??? The wallabies get none. Don't say that they play together all the time. The side last year is completely different. On top of this, even the all blacks can start the season rusty.
What I would change would be to scrap the combined country game and replace with Australia A, select a higher quality baa baas side, and don't create selection dilemmas for coaches, aka Michael foley.

 

[The big Kangaroo]

Brumbies will be incredibly competitive and the tahs to a lesser extent and the reds already gave the lions more than just a competitive game. Quit you *****ing seems that you must already be looking for an excuse for when the lions fail to live up to expectations. It clearly was not a problem in 2001 were the lions faced even less competitive sides and came out in the first test much more prepared than the walabies.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

The problem is not they are playing club teams, the problem is they play club teams without Test players.

4 years ago, the Lions played the Sharks without Smit, Bismarck du Plessis, Pienaar, Steyn, Pietersen and Kankowski. They played the Bulls without Morne Steyn, Bakkies Botha, Matfield, Ralepelle, Rossouw, du Preez

Basically, they play teams which are similar to Sale Sharks or Connacht because of all the Boks/Wallabies missing. That's the real issue!

 

[RedruthRFC]

Brumbies will be incredibly competitive and the tahs to a lesser extent and the reds already gave the lions more than just a competitive game. Quit you *****ing seems that you must already be looking for an excuse for when the lions fail to live up to expectations. It clearly was not a problem in 2001 were the lions faced even less competitive sides and came out in the first test much more prepared than the walabies.

Why does expressing dissatisfaction with the number of blow outs mean that people are looking for excuses? Ignoring the oft used "undercooked" worries, are you suggesting that the situation is satisfactory?

If we're speculating over the reasons for posts, what do you think the reason is for such a defensive stance from so many Aussies online?

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

If the B&I Lions were looking for competition and game time they should have stopped at Jo-Burg en route to Perth as the Golden Lions are looking for games as well and a sold out Ellis Park could have been beneficial ITO money for both sides as well as a more competitive side than what they have thus far encountered barring the Reds A team. Sure it's a SA club side and has nada to do with the B&I Lions touring Ozzy but they'd have been more competitive than the Baa-baas IMO and are hungry for game time. Plus a Lions vs Lions fixtures just has a nice ring to it. You can't complain that the club sides are without their stars though as the national team needs to practice just as other nations facing 2nd string B & I test teams (I'd much rather SA face a full strength Scotland for instance) have to deal with weakened touring B&I test sides.

 

[Tony Manx]

As I'm sure you know, you can do all the training you like, but you're still never going to approach real match intensity, no matter how hard you go at it. The Lions' training sessions may indeed be more intense than the games they've had so far, but that's a testament to the utter weakness of the opposition supplied (The Reds aside) rather than to the strength of their training. The fact is that due to the uncompetitiveness of the sides they've had to face on the tour thus far, the Lions risk going into the test series severely undercooked.

HaHa......don't shoot the messenger!! Quinnell was arguing your very valid point but Greenwood came back with his comments and, as have said previously, if Will talks, I listen!!

 

[TommyVercetti]

Would have liked to have seen an Australia A game. You could probably have forged a good side with players like Ben Daley, Dan Palmer, Ma'afu, James Hanson, Pyle, Kane Douglas, Beau Robinson, Jake Schatz, Auelua, Radike Samo, Burgess, Cooper, Tapuai, Fainga'a, Inman, Lachie Turner, Mogg, Drew Mitchell etc.

 

[j'nuh]

FWIW, I think the Lions have played their three easiest opponents now. The Barbarians are a mess currently - can't give many teams a decent game despite the decent players they pull. Force are (by results in Super Rugby) the weakest of the Australian teams and they played a weakened team. They made the excuse of "Super Rugby commitments", but no one else can make that excuse because Super Rugby isn't on for Australian teams until after the Lions tour. Combined Counties are the weakest team on the tour.

The Lions should get four decent non-tests in Reds, Tahs, Brumbies and Rebels though.

I must admit that the Force thing leaves a bitter taste. With the money that the Lions bring to Australian rugby, solutions should have been put in place so that Force could field a strongest XV. I would be for the Lions finding alternatives to games against the Barbarians and Combined Counties-style games though.

 

[LittleGuy]

If the B&I Lions were looking for competition and game time they should have stopped at Jo-Burg en route to Perth as the Golden Lions are looking for games as well and a sold out Ellis Park could have been beneficial ITO money for both sides as well as a more competitive side than what they have thus far encountered barring the Reds A team. Sure it's a SA club side and has nada to do with the B&I Lions touring Ozzy but they'd have been more competitive than the Baa-baas IMO and are hungry for game time. Plus a Lions vs Lions fixtures just has a nice ring to it. You can't complain that the club sides are without their stars though as the national team needs to practice just as other nations facing 2nd string B & I test teams (I'd much rather SA face a full strength Scotland for instance) have to deal with weakened touring B&I test sides.

That game would have been booked and than.....cancelled at the last minute.....

Edit: In all seriousness, it might not have been too crazy an idea but this MTN LIons chellenge has been a farce, even now the Stormers have been changed to Western Province for the next game, it ahrdly seems a match has happened without some kind of cluster-screw.

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

The lions shouldn't play combined country. They are an amateur team thrown together after two training sessions. The force should have played their first choice players. The baa baas should have selected better players. The reds almost rolled the lions and the tahs and brumbies will be competitive, maybe even the rebels. How much preparation do you want??? The wallabies get none. Don't say that they play together all the time. The side last year is completely different. On top of this, even the all blacks can start the season rusty.
What I would change would be to scrap the combined country game and replace with Australia A, select a higher quality baa baas side, and don't create selection dilemmas for coaches, aka Michael foley.

The Lions v Country match is a traditional fixture, and I can't really see it being scrapped (already they've cut it from two matches to one against a combine country team!).

 

[Jaguares]

Can't Australia provide great rivals??? The other day, Reds got in trouble to the Lions without their best players like Will Genia or James Horwill and Luke Morahan unknown wowed Lions defense.


Western Force is the worst Australian Super Rugby team, and the last combined the they faced all know that is not a competitive team. But the Reds gave him a tough fight without their best players, and I'm sure Brumbies and Waratahs will give them a lot of problems to the lions.


regards

 

[nickdnz]

The issue is that the Lions tour (and the other tours) run during Super Rugby - so midweek games often don't even have the best players avalible that aren't on the national team. Looking at France vs AB's, best player for the Blues in Luke Braid wasn't chosen - while neither was captain Ali Williams.

 

[TNT88]

Last night was awesome for rugby, a bunch of amateurs getting a run against the Lions. You might not ever see that again.

Australia A should have had a game, but the Baa Baa's fixture made more money.

Quite simply, the Lions are a test team and should roll anyone they come up against. The Tahs will put up a fight but could lose badly as well. The Brumbies will be like the Reds and give the Lions a good run.

All in all I think it will work out well.