3rd Test

[Banquo]

Tom Curry is quite the warhorse. Jeez the Lions ignored some quality players though. Schmidt is a quality coach. Random Pork musings out.

Which quality players out of interest?

[Oakboy]

Tom Curry is quite the warhorse. Jeez the Lions ignored some quality players though. Schmidt is a quality coach. Random Pork musings out.

Which quality players out of interest?

Good question. Both Willises? Or, was he meaning from the squad in which case VDF?

[Puja]

Tom Curry is quite the warhorse. Jeez the Lions ignored some quality players though. Schmidt is a quality coach. Random Pork musings out.

Which quality players out of interest?

Ritchie springs immediately to mind.

Puja

[Banquo]

Tom Curry is quite the warhorse. Jeez the Lions ignored some quality players though. Schmidt is a quality coach. Random Pork musings out.

Which quality players out of interest?

Ritchie springs immediately to mind.

Puja

Not to mine tbh, he's very good, but...even then, its not like we were light on back row talent. Except at 8.

[Puja]

Which quality players out of interest?

Ritchie springs immediately to mind.

Puja

Not to mine tbh, he's very good, but...even then, its not like we were light on back row talent. Except at 8.

Not light on back row talent, but practically no specialist 6s and it was a crying shame that, with all that back row talent, we played all three tests with a lock in the back row. If Farrell Snr wasn't planning on playing double-7s, then he shouldn't"ve picked so many in the squad. Ritchie was utterly superb in the 6N and would've been one of the first names touring in my book.

Puja

[Banquo]

Ritchie springs immediately to mind.

Puja

Not to mine tbh, he's very good, but...even then, its not like we were light on back row talent. Except at 8.

Not light on back row talent, but practically no specialist 6s and it was a crying shame that, with all that back row talent, we played all three tests with a lock in the back row. If Farrell Snr wasn't planning on playing double-7s, then he shouldn't"ve picked so many in the squad. Ritchie was utterly superb in the 6N and would've been one of the first names touring in my book.

Puja

Beirne has played a lot at 6 (as has one Tom Curry) and imo its his better position and did in fact earn his player of the series badge. As I said, not outraged Ritchie didn't make it.
The OP was about the Lions ignoring some serious talent, and I was struggling to think who those 'some' were. Still am

[Mikey Brown]

Yeah, it all comes back around to that initial plan/squad selection. Were Pollock or Earl ever seriously going to force their way in as 8s, for instance? It feels like Conan has penned in from the start and I’m curious how he’d have changed it up if he’d gone down injured.

Aki might have been more use as a route 1 number 8 to be honest.

[Banquo]

Yeah, it all comes back around to that initial plan/squad selection. Were Pollock or Earl ever seriously going to force their way in as 8s, for instance? It feels like Conan has penned in from the start and I’m curious how he’d have changed it up if he’d gone down injured.

Aki might have been more use as a route 1 number 8 to be honest.

Didn't Earl replace him yesterday? As you say tho, be interesting to get insight on the thought processes behind selection, and also whether they really were throwing Australia a huge dummy by the way they played outside the tests, which was lots of movement, lots of width, lots of offloads.

[Mikey Brown]

Yeah, it all comes back around to that initial plan/squad selection. Were Pollock or Earl ever seriously going to force their way in as 8s, for instance? It feels like Conan has penned in from the start and I’m curious how he’d have changed it up if he’d gone down injured.

Aki might have been more use as a route 1 number 8 to be honest.

Didn't Earl replace him yesterday? As you say tho, be interesting to get insight on the thought processes behind selection, and also whether they really were throwing Australia a huge dummy by the way they played outside the tests, which was lots of movement, lots of width, lots of offloads.

I meant more in terms of picking one real hard-yards carrier, with no obvious backup like Tom Willis, and then a dozen looser openside/hybrid players. It didn’t ever feel likely Earl was going to come in and play that Conan tight carrier role from the start.

Oddly enough Earl looked like the best centre on the pitch yesterday when he came on. I feel for Jones though.

[Banquo]

Yeah, it all comes back around to that initial plan/squad selection. Were Pollock or Earl ever seriously going to force their way in as 8s, for instance? It feels like Conan has penned in from the start and I’m curious how he’d have changed it up if he’d gone down injured.

Aki might have been more use as a route 1 number 8 to be honest.

Didn't Earl replace him yesterday? As you say tho, be interesting to get insight on the thought processes behind selection, and also whether they really were throwing Australia a huge dummy by the way they played outside the tests, which was lots of movement, lots of width, lots of offloads.

I meant more in terms of picking one real hard-yards carrier, with no obvious backup like Tom Willis, and then a dozen looser openside/hybrid players. It didn’t ever feel likely Earl was going to come in and play that Conan tight carrier role from the start.

Oddly enough Earl looked like the best centre on the pitch yesterday when he came on. I feel for Jones though.

He may have had two plans in mind, just speculation. As you say though, no real like for like for what Conan did; obviously Doris and Conan was plan A.

The midfield was a joke frankly.

[paddy no 11]

Sheehan a 4 match ban, 3 with tackle school. Leinster get to include pre season games in the ban, which he'd clearly never play in!

[Puja]

Sheehan a 4 match ban, 3 with tackle school. Leinster get to include pre season games in the ban, which he'd clearly never play in!

The rugby disciplinary lottery in full force. Last year Kata got a 3 week ban for a high tackle where he clashed heads, but wasn't allowed to count the next Leicester match in the ban because he had been concussed in the previous phase (which probably explained the upright tackle, cause he didn't know where he was) and therefore couldn't play, so he was effectively given a 4 week ban. At the end of the season, Sam Underhill got to count both the Prem final and the England XV game in his ban, despite that players in the former were specifically not being picked for the latter, which let him play both tests in Argentina. And today, Sheehan gets to include games that will be during the mandatory IRFU standdown period for returning Lions as part of his ban.

Comedy.

Puja

[paddy no 11]

Sheehan a 4 match ban, 3 with tackle school. Leinster get to include pre season games in the ban, which he'd clearly never play in!

The rugby disciplinary lottery in full force. Last year Kata got a 3 week ban for a high tackle where he clashed heads, but wasn't allowed to count the next Leicester match in the ban because he had been concussed in the previous phase (which probably explained the upright tackle, cause he didn't know where he was) and therefore couldn't play, so he was effectively given a 4 week ban. At the end of the season, Sam Underhill got to count both the Prem final and the England XV game in his ban, despite that players in the former were specifically not being picked for the latter, which let him play both tests in Argentina. And today, Sheehan gets to include games that will be during the mandatory IRFU standdown period for returning Lions as part of his ban.

Comedy.

Puja

Yup, ridiculous, sheehan was a nasty cheapshot with consequences for lynagh, should be consequences for sheehan too

[Which Tyler]

At the end of the season, Sam Underhill got to count both the Prem final and the England XV game in his ban, despite that players in the former were specifically not being picked for the latter, which let him play both tests in Argentina.

Although it is worth noting that England changed that policy (possibly in order to get Underhill into the tests, but possibly not) - and DID play players from the final in that match.
IMO that change in policy meant that the match counting was fair. What I object to there, is the change in policy (regardless of the reason).

I fully agree that Sheehan shouldn't be able to include matches the IRFU have already agreed that he won't be playing in.
Equally, if none of Heyes, Hill, Pepper & Spencer had played for England XV, then that match shouldn't have counted for Underhill

[paddy no 11]

Sheehan is a hell of a player and a pretty good record

But will Skelton fairly advertised he was up for a scrap Saturday and Sheehan took a cheap shot on a 3rd cap, slight out half

[Sandydragon]

Sheehan a 4 match ban, 3 with tackle school. Leinster get to include pre season games in the ban, which he'd clearly never play in!

That just grips my shit. It was a cheap shot and he should miss meaningful games, not those he would not have been part of anyway.

[Danno]

Sheehan a 4 match ban, 3 with tackle school. Leinster get to include pre season games in the ban, which he'd clearly never play in!

That just grips my shit. It was a cheap shot and he should miss meaningful games, not those he would not have been part of anyway.

I hope the biscuits he brought were exceptional.

Absolute nonsense of a disciplinary outcome and it's getting rather tiresome (or has been for a decade now). How is this meant to improve player behaviour?

[Puja]

At the end of the season, Sam Underhill got to count both the Prem final and the England XV game in his ban, despite that players in the former were specifically not being picked for the latter, which let him play both tests in Argentina.

Although it is worth noting that England changed that policy (possibly in order to get Underhill into the tests, but possibly not) - and DID play players from the final in that match.
IMO that change in policy meant that the match counting was fair. What I object to there, is the change in policy (regardless of the reason).

I fully agree that Sheehan shouldn't be able to include matches the IRFU have already agreed that he won't be playing in.
Equally, if none of Heyes, Hill, Pepper & Spencer had played for England XV, then that match shouldn't have counted for Underhill

Fair point - had forgotten about the change of plans on selection and you are correct.

It is ridiculous the latitude which disciplinary officers have to choose which games count and which don't - I'm still outraged about the Kata one. Yes, Kata's hardly the most sympathetic defendant considering he's a walking yellow card, but it was already harsh for them to declare that him being concussed and unable walk straight from a head knock in the previous phase did not give any mitigation for the head-on-head upright tackle that he put in when he staggered into the defensive line. To then use that concussion to effectively extend his ban by an extra week was completely unnecessary.

Puja