2021 British & Irish Lions Squad

[Ragey Erasmus]

6:2 I feel works well under very specific conditions (namely an extremely attractional forwards battle) and relies on no injuries. 5:3 is much more general and offers more flexibility and cover for injury at the cost of 1 less fresh forward.

I don't think the bomb squad won the game for SA, they won because of scrum dominance and their tries came from their backs. The bomb squad had no impact on the scrum, that was the SA starters and they also had minimal impact on the 2 wingers tries. Ultimately it was Jones making the wrong call particularly on Makos fitness (spotting a trend here? The guy has changed nothing in 2 years) but on grossly underestimating how much force England would need to put into the breakdown and carrying. We kept sending 1 out runners right at the big SA forwards and were then surprised when it didn't work.

I think 6:2 is overhyped, unless your forwards are dead on their feet, it won't impact the game whilst you open yourself up to all sorts of problems if you are unlucky with injuries. However any subs bench is only as good as it's use. Jones in particular has got into a mentality of barely trusting many of his subs and no longer fully utilises the bench. When he first came on the scene he made fantastic use of it and it had a defined role in the overall gameplan. Now it feels like Jones only ever uses anyone outside the starting 15 because to not do so would be complete suicide rather than having any real plan for them.

 

[will311293]

Both of you seem to be forgetting any 9 cover in these 6:2 splits.

I will think you will find @Pieter Steph du Teague , Eddie has already planned ahead of this with the Curry twins.. if Ben could play 9 why can't Tom

 

[MikeTheNative]

SA had a fairly conservative game plan during the world cup, revolved around a strong forward pack that was meant to dominate games. 6-2 split for them made sense as they wanted to keep up the intensity/pressure on the opposing pack. It has it positives + negatives, you saw one of the negatives in the England game Sunday. A early back injury can really put you on the back foot.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

SA had a fairly conservative game plan during the world cup, revolved around a strong forward pack that was meant to dominate games. 6-2 split for them made sense as they wanted to keep up the intensity/pressure on the opposing pack. It has it positives + negatives, you saw one of the negatives in the England game Sunday. A early back injury can really put you on the back foot.

Every forward game plan needs a good box kicker and passer though. If you have a 6:2 split and lose your SH early to injury your forwards arnt going to make any difference.

The proper bench split is there for a reason, to cover injury/ fitness. It's funny that no one suggests not having a TH on the bench but it's fine to either not have a SH or FH who have a much bigger impact on the game.

 

[MikeTheNative]

On the bench SA did have a scrum half and Francois Steyn who can play 10.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

On the bench SA did have a scrum half and Francois Steyn who can play 10.

That works with Steyn covering 15 and centre as well (from memory). But if you lose a winger you don't have any cover.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

6:2 is an undoubted gamble. But then again I hate the current arrangements anyway.

I'd be quite happy with a 10 player bench to properly cover all eventualities on the proviso you can only use 5 of them. Seeing a perfectly functioning front row trotting off at the appointed time 5 minutes after their half time oranges p*sses me off hugely.

Or maybe RL are onto something with their interchanges.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

6:2 is an undoubted gamble. But then again I hate the current arrangements anyway.

I'd be quite happy with a 10 player bench to properly cover all eventualities on the proviso you can only use 5 of them. Seeing a perfectly functioning front row trotting off at the appointed time 5 minutes after their half time oranges p*sses me off hugely.

Or maybe RL are onto something with their interchanges.

I'd rather see props for back to covering both sides of the scrum. I think rugby would be better off for it and the props would be too. They pretend that there is a specialty to collapsing and giving or conceding random penalties but if they trained for both sides they could play both sides.

 

[MikeTheNative]

Yeah it's a risk, as I said we saw that with England on Sunday. If a back goes down early it's a massive worry.

 

[Joele]

Every forward game plan needs a good box kicker and passer though. If you have a 6:2 split and lose your SH early to injury your forwards arnt going to make any difference.

The proper bench split is there for a reason, to cover injury/ fitness. It's funny that no one suggests not having a TH on the bench but it's fine to either not have a SH or FH who have a much bigger impact on the game.

you have to have front row cover it's mandatory

 

[Groundhog]

The Bulls now has several positive cases in their camp. Wheels in danger of falling off already

Bulls v Lions game in doubt after positive Covid tests | SuperSport

The Vodacom Bulls game against the touring British and Irish Lions on Saturday has been thrown into severe doubt after several positive Covid tests in the team's Loftus Versfeld camp.

supersport.com

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I'd rather see props for back to covering both sides of the scrum. I think rugby would be better off for it and the props would be too. They pretend that there is a specialty to collapsing and giving or conceding random penalties but if they trained for both sides they could play both sides.

100%. Most would be perfectly capable of doing a job if they tried.

 

[Jakedood]

Every forward game plan needs a good box kicker and passer though. If you have a 6:2 split and lose your SH early to injury your forwards arnt going to make any difference.

The proper bench split is there for a reason, to cover injury/ fitness. It's funny that no one suggests not having a TH on the bench but it's fine to either not have a SH or FH who have a much bigger impact on the game.

Depends on if the "22" on a 6:2 split is someone like Pienaar, who's amazing at both roles

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

I think the only way a 6:2 split works with the Lions is if you go for 10. Biggar/Russell 12. Farrell 13. Henshaw, 23. Daly with Daly covering 13 outwards and both Faz and Henshaw able to shift inwards to fill 10 and 12 or if you go for 10. Biggar/Russell 12. Henshaw 13. Daly, 23. Farrell with Farrell able to come on at 10 or 12 with Henshaw covering 13 and Daly able to shift into the back three. Not that that's what I'd go for, but that's how it would work.

 

[General Melchett]

I think the only way a 6:2 split works with the Lions is if you go for 10. Biggar/Russell 12. Farrell 13. Henshaw, 23. Daly with Daly covering 13 outwards and both Faz and Henshaw able to shift inwards to fill 10 and 12 or if you go for 10. Biggar/Russell 12. Henshaw 13. Daly, 23. Farrell with Farrell able to come on at 10 or 12 with Henshaw covering 13 and Daly able to shift into the back three. Not that that's what I'd go for, but that's how it would work.

Another last resort option is Hogg covering 10 like he is doing tomorrow. He's played there for the Lions and Scotland before and while not ideal it would mean that Farrell could be dispensed with and you could arguably have a stronger midfield e.g. Biggar - Henshaw/Aki - Henshaw/Harris with Daly and a SH in the bench. I guess they would need to measure whether the upgrade on Farrell at centre has more weight than than the potential Farrell > Hogg downgrade at 10 (if needed).

 

[big ginger 8]

I think the only way a 6:2 split works with the Lions is if you go for 10. Biggar/Russell 12. Farrell 13. Henshaw, 23. Daly with Daly covering 13 outwards and both Faz and Henshaw able to shift inwards to fill 10 and 12 or if you go for 10. Biggar/Russell 12. Henshaw 13. Daly, 23. Farrell with Farrell able to come on at 10 or 12 with Henshaw covering 13 and Daly able to shift into the back three. Not that that's what I'd go for, but that's how it would work.

Not that I'm advocating for it but the sexy side would then be, presuming you have a starting backrow of Beirne, Curry/Watson, Faletau, you can have Curry/Watson and Conan on the bench. Gives you the tactical versatility of moving to dual opensides and allows you to introduce two really dynamic carriers late on when the game is looser.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Not that I'm advocating for it but the sexy side would then be, presuming you have a starting backrow of Beirne, Curry/Watson, Faletau, you can have Curry/Watson and Conan on the bench. Gives you the tactical versatility of moving to dual opensides and allows you to introduce two really dynamic carriers late on when the game is looser.

You could still quite easily go for Watson/Curry and Conan on the bench in a 5:3 split with Beirne acting as lock cover.

 

[big ginger 8]

You could still quite easily go for Watson/Curry and Conan on the bench in a 5:3 split with Beirne acting as lock cover.

You could absolutely and it did cross my mind. I should have mentioned the idea of Lawes coming on as well is pretty enticing. It also ironically looks weird to me. Probably all moot anyway, can't remember Gatland ever employing a 6:2.

 

[Dean Cooperfield-West]

You could absolutely and it did cross my mind. I should have mentioned the idea of Lawes coming on as well is pretty enticing. It also ironically looks weird to me. Probably all moot anyway, can't remember Gatland ever employing a 6:2.

Gatland has done it more often than I thought. Most recently was the 2019 WC pool match against Uruguay. He had 2 scrum halves on the bench to cover the backs.

 

[General Melchett]

Saturday's game against the Bulls is off because of COVID in the home camp.

South Africa's match against Georgia off

South Africa's match against Georgia is cancelled because of Covid-19 cases in both teams, fewer than three weeks before the Springboks face the British and Irish Lions.

www.bbc.co.uk