v AB'S - First Test

Moderators: Puja, Misc Forum Mod

Post Reply
User avatar
skidger
Posts: 213
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 9:09 am

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by skidger »

WaspInWales wrote:ESPN has Farrell down as missing two tackles. I thought he missed at least 4.

Those walesonline ratings are a piss take.
You get the impression some are when there is a rival that is Welsh like George getting a 4/10 but the ratings are pretty brutal right across the board.
Banquo
Posts: 19271
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Banquo »

Adam_P wrote:
Banquo wrote:
Adam_P wrote:Lawes had to be involved in the next test. He has been the form lock in the previous Lions fixtures and Kruis and AWJ were average to poor today. Yet again, the omission of Lauchbury is made to look laughable.

Though Teo went well at 12, especially defensively in the second half. Sinckler looked good when he came on, and I would have brought him on far earlier.
wouldn't underestimate Kruis's influence on the lineout, but he turned it over badly today.
A good argument if our line out was faultless, but it wasn't particularly great today. He coughed up a lot of ball around the park too. Having said that though I'd still go with Kruis paired with Lawes and Itjoe on the bench.
Our lineout was faultless until Owens came on, and furthermore hugely disrupted the the kiwi lineout, which kept us in the game early doors. I did say he turned it over.
User avatar
morepork
Posts: 7530
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 1:50 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by morepork »

RETALLICKA
Doorzetbornandbred
Posts: 404
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 6:03 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Doorzetbornandbred »

morepork wrote:RETALLICKA
On a seek and destroy mission tonight.
Banquo
Posts: 19271
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Banquo »

Doorzetbornandbred wrote:
morepork wrote:RETALLICKA
On a seek and destroy mission tonight.
Nothing else matters
fivepointer
Posts: 5922
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:42 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by fivepointer »

jared_7 wrote:Good test match, I thought there were periods when it looked like the ABs were going to run away with it but the Lions kept going and surprised me. I don't think the injuries to Smith and Crotty helped the ABs, Cruden has stagnated and isn't a patch on Barrett and Crotty was looking solid.

The Lions try was something special and there was another break, eventually breaking down when Watson pushed a pass, that was magical as well.

In the end it probably came down to the fact the Lions had maybe 3 opportunities and converted just one, while the ABs took their 3. I suspect this may be the closest the Lions get, at least in terms of performance. The ABs are usually rusty first test and as we gel hopefully those periods of dominance will get longer and longer.

Read and Smith my two ABs MOTM. Great to see Smith back to his best and Read leading from the front.
Failure to convert good positions into scores has been a recurring flaw with these Lions. Get to 5m out of the tryline and you simply HAVE to score.
Didnt see much evidence of NZ being rusty. Some of their attacking play, with quick ball, transfers and offloads was a joy to watch.
Felt NZ did their homework - as you would expect. Lions got no go forward, or penalties, from scrums and their driving maul was very well contained.
Lions did have some good periods and did score a great try, but the difference in quality was there for all to see by the end.
Beasties
Posts: 1321
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:31 am

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Beasties »

I can't see the sense in dropping Te'o to pay Farrell there at all. The Lions backline visibly wilted when Te'o went off. Either play Farrell at 10 or not.

NZ's pace that they put on the game in the first half was stunning, I was shocked that the Lions managed to just about compete at that point. There were wave upon wave of incisive lightning attacks with amazing skill levels on display. I take my hat off to Aaron Smith (who has hardly been mentioned). What a player. Every breakdown was shifted on at breakneck speed, the guy's an absolute firefly. One mistake I counted by him. I'd defy any international team to not improve 20% with him at SH. Imagine those NZ players with Youngs at 9. They'd not look so clever then would they?

Wonderful first try for the Lions though. Absolute belter.
Banquo
Posts: 19271
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Banquo »

Beasties wrote:I can't see the sense in dropping Te'o to pay Farrell there at all. The Lions backline visibly wilted when Te'o went off. Either play Farrell at 10 or not.

NZ's pace that they put on the game in the first half was stunning, I was shocked that the Lions managed to just about compete at that point. There were wave upon wave of incisive lightning attacks with amazing skill levels on display. I take my hat off to Aaron Smith (who has hardly been mentioned). What a player. Every breakdown was shifted on at breakneck speed, the guy's an absolute firefly. One mistake I counted by him. I'd defy any international team to not improve 20% with him at SH. Imagine those NZ players with Youngs at 9. They'd not look so clever then would they?

Wonderful first try for the Lions though. Absolute belter.
whilst I agree, everyone but the EMB (and rest of the board) seems to think Faz a world class 10 and 12- Eddie even clearly thinks he's a good 12; Grant Fox said he sees no flaws in his game. I'm confused- I think what we saw from Faz today was what we normally see, but with less ball. Teo should have stayed on for sure.

and yes on Aaron Smith, he's been the best 9 for a while now, bar his dodgy night club phase or whatever it was. Read was even more impressive given he's hardly played.
Matt Ha
Posts: 279
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 2:56 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Matt Ha »

I feel Russel should come onto the bench. He brings an attacking swagger to a game (check highlights of Scotland's test against Italy and Wallabies) that others can't, and replacing Farrell with Sexton, or visa versa, always seems to be pretty much swapping like with like.
User avatar
Adam_P
Posts: 1728
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2016 11:14 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Adam_P »

Beasties wrote:I can't see the sense in dropping Te'o to pay Farrell there at all. The Lions backline visibly wilted when Te'o went off. Either play Farrell at 10 or not.
Absolutely agreed, was pretty unimpressed (though not surprised) when I saw Sexton coming on that it was Teo coming off rather than Farrell. I just don't get why everyone is so keen to shoe horn him into the side at all costs.
Beasties
Posts: 1321
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:31 am

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Beasties »

Tbf I didn't think Sexton brought much to the party. What he did bring was the exit of Te'o. Farrell shuffled sideways as did the NZ defence after that.
User avatar
Sandydragon
Posts: 10534
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Sandydragon »

Adam_P wrote:
Beasties wrote:I can't see the sense in dropping Te'o to pay Farrell there at all. The Lions backline visibly wilted when Te'o went off. Either play Farrell at 10 or not.
Absolutely agreed, was pretty unimpressed (though not surprised) when I saw Sexton coming on that it was Teo coming off rather than Farrell. I just don't get why everyone is so keen to shoe horn him into the side at all costs.
It really didn't work today. Commentators talking about bringing the back three into the game, but all I saw was two fly halves passing the ball and no one getting over the gainline.
dk4
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 12:45 am

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by dk4 »

So whats the info for AB injuries?
-B Smith HIA?
-Kaino concussion?
-Crotty hamstring?
User avatar
morepork
Posts: 7530
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 1:50 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by morepork »

Banquo wrote:
Doorzetbornandbred wrote:
morepork wrote:RETALLICKA
On a seek and destroy mission tonight.
Nothing else matters

One

has No Remorse.
Digby
Posts: 13436
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Digby »

The Lions tried to fight fire with fire, but in the end we were left to watch their performance fade to black, sad but true.
Banquo
Posts: 19271
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Banquo »

Digby wrote:The Lions tried to fight fire with fire, but in the end we were left to watch their performance fade to black, sad but true.
Enter Sandman, Digby, zzzzzzzzzzzzz
User avatar
Eugene Wrayburn
Posts: 2308
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 8:32 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Eugene Wrayburn »

Much better team won by not as much as I feared, but the score reflected the game. We kicked too much ball away and didn't chase it well enough. I can't think when I've seen the ABs ahead by significant margins on territory and posession. That partly reflects that we slowed their normal rate of scoring, but we barely looked like troubling them consistently from phase play. Couple of great bits of counter-attacking. Crappy levels of support for most breaks as is all too common in the NH.

that's probably as good as it gets for us. Rieko will get even better. Read will get even better. SBW will get better. Losing Ben Smith and Crotty disrupted the ABs shape in this game but even if they don't return the ABs have more than adequate replacements for them.
I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.

NS. Gone but not forgotten.
User avatar
Galfon
Posts: 4297
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 8:07 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Galfon »

dk4 wrote:So whats the info for AB injuries?
-B Smith HIA?
-Kaino concussion?
-Crotty hamstring?
Gaffer's words..
'Smith failed a concussion test "so he'll go through all the protocols and we'll see how he is," Hansen said.'
"Ryan Crotty has pulled his hammy, so we already had Jack Goodhue in as a replacement to help him out with his ribs.
"Jack will be staying with us, and we will try to get Ryan ready maybe  for the last test if we're lucky."
( it's Smith's third case of concussion this season )
Don't know about Kaino - thought he was carrying a shoulder injury anyhoo.
Banquo
Posts: 19271
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Banquo »

cashead wrote:
Banquo wrote:Has Bin Smuff had problems with concussion before?
He's had more than his share of them.
bu55er. Great player. Is it a growing issue with you- he and Coles is a fair proportion of top players (I know Beudan's eldest bro had to quit too)
Banquo
Posts: 19271
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Banquo »

cashead wrote:
Matt Ha wrote:I feel Russel should come onto the bench. He brings an attacking swagger to a game (check highlights of Scotland's test against Italy and Wallabies) that others can't, and replacing Farrell with Sexton, or visa versa, always seems to be pretty much swapping like with like.
I'd say Gatland should go big or go home and start Russell in the next test. Sexton's been shit, Biggar's been shit, and the best 10 that had started until this point, Farrell, was well below the standard that he'd set for himself.

I don't rate Marler as a scrummager, so I'd put McGrath in at 1 (Vunipola on the bench), probably go with Owens or Best at 2 (I'd lean towards Owens at the moment. Best is a fine player, and adds a lot particularly at the breakdown, but when it comes to lineouts, he couldn't hit water if he fell out of a boat), and maybe give Furlong another chance at 3 with Sinckler on the bench again.

If Lawes is fit to play, I'd put him in the second row with Itoje, with Kruis on the bench - Kruis should have built up enough good will on this tour to give him the benefit of the doubt that his poor performance in test 1 was a blip.

Back row - to be honest, O'Mahony would've been the 6 I'd picked if I were in Gatland's shoes. Doing a double openside may work once with the All Blacks, maybe, before they get ripped apart by the ABs backrow in subsequent fixtures (see: the Wallabies and Hoopcock - worked once, has never worked again). I don't think Faletau should be dropped either, when he was by far the most effective of the loose forwards, and O'Brien worked all night and got some key turnovers. I'd perhaps bring Tipuric on to the bench in place of Warburton, who added fuck-all, or maybe Stander - although his lack of pace has been exposed a few times on tour, most notably against the Blues.

Halfbacks - Murray, if fit and Webb if not. Both played well. I suppose Laidlaw would be the next cab off the rank.

First-five - As I said, Russell to start, Farrell at 22.

Midfield - Te'o and Davies, whom despite the antipathy towards him from some (I'm looking in your direction, Eugene). Why Joseph was nowhere near the test team, I don't know, so I'd put him on the bench.

Back three - Generally played OK, and Liam Williams didn't do anything stupid so I'd retain them. No idea what Halfpenny added, so I'd swap him out with Seymour or Payne.
Thought George went ok- great darts- what did you see?
Banquo
Posts: 19271
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Banquo »

cashead wrote:
Banquo wrote:Thought George went ok- great darts- what did you see?
Offered a fair amount in the lineouts, sure. I'll grant that one. And while he wasn't lazy or anything, he was comprehensively outplayed elsewhere by Taylor, and gave up a few turnovers when the Lions could ill afford them.
By comprehensively outplayed you mean Taylor scored a good try and carried 3 times for 18 yards (inc the try), to Georges 7 carries for only 5 and one turnover (which was actually no support for a mini break round a ruck). On the other hand, George did make 20 tackles, missing 2, to Taylors 4, missing one. Just saying- though can't tell from the stats about impact on the breakdown.

(Codie will be getting a fair amount of coaching I suspect , this week).
Last edited by Banquo on Sat Jun 24, 2017 10:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Banquo
Posts: 19271
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Banquo »

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:Much better team won by not as much as I feared, but the score reflected the game. We kicked too much ball away and didn't chase it well enough. I can't think when I've seen the ABs ahead by significant margins on territory and posession. That partly reflects that we slowed their normal rate of scoring, but we barely looked like troubling them consistently from phase play. Couple of great bits of counter-attacking. Crappy levels of support for most breaks as is all too common in the NH.

that's probably as good as it gets for us. Rieko will get even better. Read will get even better. SBW will get better. Losing Ben Smith and Crotty disrupted the ABs shape in this game but even if they don't return the ABs have more than adequate replacements for them.
agreed on the kicking- had a bit of joy, but eventually it was just gifts.
Timbo
Posts: 2259
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 9:05 am

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Timbo »

I don't think huge changes to the team is an answer for anything tbh. These are the best players in the best combinations the Lions have, give or take a couple.
Cameo
Posts: 3011
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 9:14 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Cameo »

Digby wrote:The Lions tried to fight fire with fire, but in the end we were left to watch their performance fade to black, sad but true.
Afraid that is slightly the Lions trying to rewrite history. Yes, they counter attacked which was good to see but in general play I think the plan was as we all expected
Banquo
Posts: 19271
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: v AB'S - First Test

Post by Banquo »

Cameo wrote:
Digby wrote:The Lions tried to fight fire with fire, but in the end we were left to watch their performance fade to black, sad but true.
Afraid that is slightly the Lions trying to rewrite history. Yes, they counter attacked which was good to see but in general play I think the plan was as we all expected
Metallica song titles.....
Post Reply