The Rugby Thread

[E17yid]

Regarding the 15pt deficit, the Lions burned at least a couple of tries that were there for the taking. Farrell missed at least one kick that you'd expect him to make as well. I get that the ABs dominated large stretches of general play -- reflected in possession and territory stats -- but, even so, had the Lions finished off even half of the opportunities that they created they'd have been in it up to their eyeballs.

I don't think Gatland and co need to reinvent the wheel. They did a lot of things right, IMO. Just need more efficiency.

(From a NZer.)

Plus, we gifted them 7 points with that hospital pass from sexton and bad drop from Williams.

Their first try was sloppy defending by us as well.

 

[talkshowhost86]

One thing I noticed today was the comparative rarity of Lions box kicking. I know I've got a thing about it, but denying the ABs 'free' ball that they were gobbling up last week reduces their scoring chances. Increasing the tempo and keeping the ball in hand increases our scoring chances.

Result? A slightly narrower win for the AB's!

Trust me; we'll be beating them by the time the 4th Test comes around.

I do agree about the box kicking, particularly as our chase wasn't very good. If that's the tactic (i.e. no more box kicking) then I'd probably start with Webb over Murray just for that added bit of verve around the pack (albeit there's not a huge difference between them.

I certainly agree about ball in hand, and that was clearly where we hurt them the most in the first test. We clearly weren't making any headway in the scrums or when we tried to drive from line-outs, so it would make sense to forget all of that and just try and run it.

With that in mind though, I do wonder if we've got the backs to play that type of game, more importantly whether we've got the centres to do that. Te'o and Davies both did well in the first test (Davies particularly) but I just wonder if we've missed a trick not trying the Farrell-Josephs combo at some point on this tour. If we're going to keep the ball in hand, it seems a shame to not have our most dynamic centre on the pitch in some capacity.

I think I asked this earlier in the thread, but does Davies have any experience of playing at 12?

 

[E17yid]

I do agree about the box kicking, particularly as our chase wasn't very good. If that's the tactic (i.e. no more box kicking) then I'd probably start with Webb over Murray just for that added bit of verve around the pack (albeit there's not a huge difference between them.

I certainly agree about ball in hand, and that was clearly where we hurt them the most in the first test. We clearly weren't making any headway in the scrums or when we tried to drive from line-outs, so it would make sense to forget all of that and just try and run it.

With that in mind though, I do wonder if we've got the backs to play that type of game, more importantly whether we've got the centres to do that. Te'o and Davies both did well in the first test (Davies particularly) but I just wonder if we've missed a trick not trying the Farrell-Josephs combo at some point on this tour. If we're going to keep the ball in hand, it seems a shame to not have our most dynamic centre on the pitch in some capacity.

I think I asked this earlier in the thread, but does Davies have any experience of playing at 12?

Not to my knowledge, mate. Could be wrong but I can't recall a single instance where he's started at 12.

I'm sure he could do a job but he's an outside centre, through and through.

 

[E17yid]

Fucking hell, just read a crazy stat. Tipuric made 20 tackles today and missed none which takes him up to a tour total of 54 tackles, none missed.

He better be involved in the last test, so should Biggar.

Sounds like Henderson and Lawes stoke the show today, though.

In light of Hendersons great game (minus the yellow) I think my combo of Itoje and Henderson with Lawes on the bench is a good shout but I guess Henderson wo t make the bench if he took Lawes off and not him. We'll see I guess but it looks like Kruis and Itoje.

 

[E17yid]

Just read Kruis came on. Maybe he won't be in the 23

 

[Arnoldtoo]

Just read Kruis came on. Maybe he won't be in the 23

Gatland said: "So much was made about devaluing the jersey, so we made a decision we would try and get through the game with as many of the starting XV as we could."​

I think he took Lawes off to rest him before saturday, and given the above Kruis was the only available replacement.

 

[E17yid]

Gatland said: "So much was made about devaluing the jersey, so we made a decision we would try and get through the game with as many of the starting XV as we could."​

I think he took Lawes off to rest him before saturday, and given the above Kruis was the only available replacement.

AWJ came on as a sub in the chiefs game and he started so it's anyone's guess. Would seem harsh on Henderson if he misses out on the 23

 

[Arnoldtoo]

AWJ came on as a sub in the chiefs game and he started so it's anyone's guess. Would seem harsh on Henderson if he misses out on the 23

I reckon it will be a toss up between Henderson and AWJ for a bench place.

 

[E17yid]

I reckon it will be a toss up between Henderson and AWJ for a bench place.

With Itoje, Lawes starting?

 

[Arnoldtoo]

With Itoje, Lawes starting?

Yes, and with Kruis already on the bench.

 

[E17yid]

Yes, and with Kruis already on the bench.

Would be a bold selection. Inexperienced and untested at this level but exciting given their current form.

When you add George in there you're talking about a few inexperienced players in the pack.

Talking of George, he must be the first player in rugby history who's first international cap is with the Lions.

 

[talkshowhost86]

Would be a bold selection. Inexperienced and untested at this level but exciting given their current form.

When you add George in there you're talking about a few inexperienced players in the pack.

Talking of George, he must be the first player in rugby history who's first international cap is with the Lions.

I assume you mean first international starts as George has got caps, but yes there can't be many. Well deserved to be honest...he should be ahead of Hartley for England.

As for lack of experience, Lawes and Itoje are both more than experienced enough, and with SOB, POM and Faletau behind them I don't think lack of experience is an issue.

 

[Arnoldtoo]

Would be a bold selection. Inexperienced and untested at this level but exciting given their current form.

When you add George in there you're talking about a few inexperienced players in the pack.

Talking of George, he must be the first player in rugby history who's first international cap is with the Lions.

On George I trust Gatland's judgement more than Jones's.

With the selection we lose AWJ's experience but we gain dynamism, which was lacking last saturday.

 

[E17yid]

On George I trust Gatland's judgement more than Jones's.

With the selection we lose AWJ's experience but we gain dynamism, which was lacking last saturday.

Out of interest, what do you mean by dynamism?

 

[E17yid]

I assume you mean first international starts as George has got caps, but yes there can't be many. Well deserved to be honest...he should be ahead of Hartley for England.

As for lack of experience, Lawes and Itoje are both more than experienced enough, and with SOB, POM and Faletau behind them I don't think lack of experience is an issue.

I could be wrong but I always took caps to mean starts. Sub appearances are exactly that, appearances.

Disgrace to the shirt if you ask me, picking these players who don't even play for their country.

 

[Arnoldtoo]

Out of interest, what do you mean by dynamism?

I speak from experience when I define it as the elastic explosiveness more readily available to the young!

 

[Arnoldtoo]

I assume you mean first international starts as George has got caps, but yes there can't be many. Well deserved to be honest...he should be ahead of Hartley for England.

As for lack of experience, Lawes and Itoje are both more than experienced enough, and with SOB, POM and Faletau behind them I don't think lack of experience is an issue.

Do you think he'll keep the back row the same? (You might have said somewhere, but that would mean scrolling and everything.)

 

[E17yid]

I speak from experience when I define it as the elastic explosiveness more readily available to the young!

Fair enough, I think there's more to it than that and the 2 don't always go hand in hand.

I only ask as it seems to mean different things to different people. I was chatting to this English rugby fan at work and was, like the rest of the global rugby community, singing the praises of Ratallik and saying how he's such a complete player blah blah blah and he just said, he's good but Itoje and Lawes are much more dynamic. I asked him to clarify this and he talked about Ratallik's build and how he's a bit cumbersome and slow which baffled me but, like I say, it seems to mean speed and power to some people, to others it's workrste and to some (like the idiot I was talking to) it's about your build.

 

[talkshowhost86]

Do you think he'll keep the back row the same? (You might have said somewhere, but that would mean scrolling and everything.)

I think he might unless he decides Tipuric gets in based on today.

Warburton was pretty irrelevant off the bench last week so not sure he justifies selection and Garland seemed to sack off Stander fairly early on in the tour.

 

[E17yid]

I think he might unless he decides Tipuric gets in based on today.

Warburton was pretty irrelevant off the bench last week so not sure he justifies selection and Garland seemed to sack off Stander fairly early on in the tour.

Irrelevant is a tad harsh. He was competitive at the breakdown, as you'd expect.

TBH, I would not be at all surprised if Warbs starts.