• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

South Africa vs British and Irish Lions - Test 3

Now I've calmed down a bit..... fair play to SA they hadn't played for however long which shows how poor the Lion's were.

But.

The Lion's didn't really form a game plan with settled combinations. Don't really blame the players or the coaches for this, COVID played a part, along with the poor quality of opposition in the warm up games which were I'm hindsight totally pointless exercises.

Hope this virus does one soon, win or loose I love the Lion's tours but that wasn't enjoyable on any level.
How is the length of time SA not played at all relevant, the Lions are not a cohesive squad who ever outside of the tour play together.
 
How is the length of time SA not played at all relevant, the Lions are not a cohesive squad who ever outside of the tour play together.
I agree they are not a cohesive squad. However the majority of the lions players have had regular rugby and international rugby, which the South Africans haven't. On top some of them will have played together and have an understanding. Yes they still have to come together, but they should have been in better condition than S.A
 
Well, there's enough gatland hate going around so I don't want to add any more weight to that, but I'm glad he lost his all blacks audition with this performance ( him doing this tour was no doubt one of the reasons fosters contract was only until the end of this year), and by going 0 in 8 in super rugby aotearoa last year (chiefs were second favourite last year, and ended up making this years final without gatland).
 
I agree they are not a cohesive squad. However the majority of the lions players have had regular rugby and international rugby, which the South Africans haven't. On top some of them will have played together and have an understanding. Yes they still have to come together, but they should have been in better condition than S.A
A fair SAs few play in the premiership and other leagues outside of SA, so outside of international duty would have similar rugby, not to mention the Sarries contingent which was the majority of English representation has been playing in a sub standard league by comparison, of course one can make an argument that they are mostly out of form and in most cases probably shouldn't have been picked which I agree with, just don't see how none of this is factored into commmets whilst commending the boks (current world champions) haven't played in a fair whilst when during a fair chunk of that period no one played.
 
Maybe the Northern Hemisphere should simply try being better at rugby.
 
Hey that's a bit harsh, I'm sure they try.

also, havent wanted to say it, but awj hasn't been all that bad.

He hasn't been bad, he's done all the basics (made his tackles, hit rucks, carried, etc.) that are standard for an international second row he just hasn't been as good as it's been made out (such as the example above) by the media and Welsh fans, which is why he gets a lot of stick from other corners. Plus, there are other players who probably would have had a bigger impact on the game if they'd been given the chance (Henderson).
 
He hasn't been bad, he's done all the basics (made his tackles, hit rucks, carried, etc.) that are standard for an international second row he just hasn't been as good as it's been made out (such as the example above) by the media and Welsh fans, which is why he gets a lot of stick from other corners. Plus, there are other players who probably would have had a bigger impact on the game if they'd been given the chance (Henderson).
Passive in the carry, passive in the tackle, ineffective at the ruck.

He's been poor for an international second row.
 
Passive in the carry, passive in the tackle, ineffective at the ruck.

He's been poor for an international second row.

We're arguing over the semantics of poor v standard, but I think we can agree that he has been nowhere near as good or as effective in the test games as the media have made him out to be.
 
We're arguing over the semantics of poor v standard, but I think we can agree that he has been nowhere near as good or as effective in the test games as the media have made him out to be.
Ummm no that's poor. Beard looked better than him in the tackle and ruck and that's saying something from a real average operator.

I expect a standard quality international lock to make big tackles, be effective in the ruck.
 
Initial selection: shite
First and second test selection: probably about as best as he could have done bar Biggar
Tactics: absolute ****
Final test selection: Pants on heads dumb
Entertainment value: none
2017: Bailed out by Johnny "IMF" Sexton who he didn't think was good enough to start the first test
2013: Reliant on an injury to the shite oppos key place kicker to win.
Legacy: **** all

Good riddance Warren, I'll never wholly be in support of the Lions, and that's nothing to do with him, but over his 8 years I went from a supporter putting Irish interests first to someone actively supporting the opposition. 2021 has to go down as the worst tour ever despite the possibility of having some of the most exciting and effective combos the team would have ever seen.
 
Initial selection: shite
First and second test selection: probably about as best as he could have done bar Biggar
Tactics: absolute ****
Final test selection: Pants on heads dumb
Entertainment value: none
2017: Bailed out by Johnny "IMF" Sexton who he didn't think was good enough to start the first test
2013: Reliant on an injury to the shite oppos key place kicker to win.
Legacy: **** all

Good riddance Warren, I'll never wholly be in support of the Lions, and that's nothing to do with him, but over his 8 years I went from a supporter putting Irish interests first to someone actively supporting the opposition. 2021 has to go down as the worst tour ever despite the possibility of having some of the most exciting and effective combos the team would have ever seen.
May I ask why out of interest?
 
The one good thing to (hopefully) come out of this series loss is the non continuation of Gatland as HC.

I was in disbelief watching his post match interview where he claimed 'we tried to play rugby' and yet gave Russell very little credit and chose to highlight his (very few) errors. Russell was 100% from the tee and was the best Lion on the pitch. How can Gatland take the credit for 'trying to play rugby' given his tactics and when his preferred half backs were Murray and Biggar (which pretty much blunted the Lions attack). He just couldn't wait to bring Murray back for the second test even though Price did well in the first test. Shout outs to Henderson, Beirne and Mish who were hard done by and were deprived of test caps. How did Gatland's 'credit in the bank' picks work out? I'm sure he said he could get out of form players back to their best. Hmmm

He also chose to praise Marcus Smith during his post match presser calling him an absolute superstar. Looked to me like me was auditioning to replace Eddie Jones or was trying to take credit for being the one who put Smith on the big stage. Good riddance to yesterday's man – an old school grudge holding coach who is living off past glories and now has a 33% series win rate as Lions HC. Time for fresh blood Lions board.
 
Last edited:
Quite apart from Gatland's mistakes we also missed North, Underhill and Kruis for various reasons all of whom would have been right up for the physical battle. Fully fit all would have been in my starting XV.

Hen's teeth territory, granted but if Binny and Manu had been anything like on form / fit they'd have played a part too.
 
Top