Rugby - Hands Off White!

[LDiCesare]

Laporte is apparently happy of the French tour, with 2 defeats and one null.
In times past, such tours would have been an objective unto themselves but now they are mostly seen as preparation for the World Cup.
Considering the null was apparently a top-level match and the match against the Wallabies developped good rugby, Laporte's stance can be understood. We didn't bring all the usual players (mainly lacking Betsen imo, but also Dominici and Pelous) and Laporte gave their chance to many players (Szarszewski, Candelon, Martin...).

[Havak]

It was pretty awesome wasn’t it? That is a team on the verge of something special I think.

Though Australia didn’t bowl very well to be honest.

I’m only kidding – I meant the All Blacks of course.

The Kiwi boys should be happy – and rightly so. Pretty damn good boys.

I do wish Clive would shut his gob sometimes – talk of “not understanding the tour” and “wrapped in cotton wool” helps no one to be honest. Suck it up Clive – the better side won.

I don’t think the Lions played badly as such and the forwards certainly fronted up better but the team were simply over matched. I have to confess I was left breathless at times by the ABs ability to offload from the tackle.

It wasn’t perfect by them of course – and having been treated to a Sky Sports post mortem program that analysed the game in detail I could mention a few things that will no doubt annoy the Kiwi boys – but I’ll save that for later and just leave it at the fact that they were pretty damn good on Saturday for now.

If they can take it on the road this tri-nations and thump the other two in their own back yard I think this team will become very hard for anyone to then stop before the RWC. Having said that it’s a long way out yet…and it really is key the show is taken on the road as NZ are after all consistently good at home. I guess it is also worrying that Umaga will be 34 in 2007? By conventional wisdom that is too old for a centre?

Interestingly for the Lions if Smith had not taken a knock in training last week he would have started at 13 (and Robinson would not have figured in the XV) according to Clive. It wouldn’t have made any real difference but Smith is the type of player that I think the NZ public would appreciate – he plays like an NZ back after all. I think you will see a younger side in the final test to be honest – it is the time to let them play.

I heard a shocking rumour yesterday btw – is it true Dan Carter has an English parent?

He’s pretty good isn’t he – easy to see why Carlos was dispensed with. Shame he is now injured – does that mean Mehrtens?

I have to say a few myths were also exploded Saturday. Shame Williams proved all our fears as he bounced off NZ players either with or without the ball. One tackle aside Henson was simply ****e and should concentrate on rugby not his hair, fake tan and wild girlfriend in future.

I said at the time that the Welsh beat the worst England side for a decade by just one point in Cardiff – they are not as good as the fact they Slammed suggests – because they had no real tests in the tournament (Ireland and France going largely awol). The running game simply doesn’t work when the opposition are better at it.

I’d keep Thomas, Jenkins and Ryan Jones from the Welsh. Peel got bullied off the ball exactly as predicted so Cusiter comes in for me. White has sadly gone over his best offering little outside the scrum so Big Andy Sheridan should be given a run. Robinson has to go - even my deceased grandparents have worked him out.

There’s more – but that can wait.

I see Australia made hard work of their Rugby match – and lost some key players to injury including the Centre who has been their best weapon against the ABs recently? Any idea how bad Mortlock’s injury is Finbar? Gregans sounded like just a knock?

[Andydog]

A better Lions performance. Shame they couldn't do much with the pill once they got it. I thought Fat Guts Thompson played fairly well, although his flabby gob tainted his performance somewhat. I felt sorry for Wilkinson - a shadow of his former self, with Carter completely outshining him in all aspects of play.

I almost wept when Umaga scored the first All Black try. If ever there was an 'up yours sir spastic', this was it. (Yes am I still a bit bitter about the spin - especially when you hear that the All Blacks requested BoD's phone number, and were not given it for 24 hours, by which time 4 press conferences had been given lambasting Umaga for not apologising or getting in touch. Tossers. ).

Originally posted by Havak
I do wish Clive would shut his gob sometimes – talk of “not understanding the tour” and “wrapped in cotton wool” helps no one to be honest. Suck it up Clive – the better side won.

Aye. Here are some more of Woodentop's wonder lines:

Chinless Woodentop's post game comments:
We weren't beaten by a better team but we were beaten by the score board. The score didn't reflect the Lions effort. We just came up against an outstanding team...

...it was a key, key moment when Wilkinson hit the post [early in the 1st half], we could have had momentum then...

[On being asked where it all went wrong] ...we were missing key players, big players on this tour - the likes of Dallaglio, Simon Taylor, Richard Hill...

So yes, more of the usual bloody nonsense from a character whose stock continues to fall. He needs to face facts - England and now the Lions have been thumped in consecutive years by a side who he doesn't rate as the better team.

The ABs put down a serious marker for the World Cup and they did their talking on the pitch. Fair play to them.

It wasn’t perfect by them of course – and having been treated to a Sky Sports post mortem program that analysed the game in detail I could mention a few things that will no doubt annoy the Kiwi boys – but I’ll save that for later and just leave it at the fact that they were pretty damn good on Saturday for now.

Yes, I must admit our performance was tainted somewhat by the ABs being involved in a lot of blocking, pulling back and tackling off the ball.

There were numerous occasions when they got away with this. I know every international side does it, but the ABs got away with it blatantly time and time again on Saturday. For example, Carter's grubber kick and chase, Shane Williams was taken out by Soialo'o. Now, I don't believe Williams would have got near Carter, but that's not the point.

Robinson was taken out from one of his kicks ahead. Lewsey was similarly taken out on a number of occasions. Soialo'o blocked Moody on every restart.

I don't think any of this changed the match however, even if the ref had picked up on it, the Lions still would not have won. Nor are they whiter than white - they also committed infringements as well.

But this is what will constitute the whinging this week. Personally, I think it's a shame that NZ felt they wanted to resort to those kinds of tactics, we just didn't need to.

Having said that, it was interesting to see that the swinging handbags on the pitch came from the boys in red.

Julian White put a very nasty stomp on Byron's arm. I do hope he rung him afterwards to apologise, he could have broken that arm.

[Andydog]

Some more giggles:

[Havak]

It's rather frustrating that you have picked up nearly everything for me Andydog.

Who was the player that traded punches with White? Julian was taken off before he would have been sent off - I've seen his temper build like that at Welford Road.

It is a serious marker for the RWC - but I would again point out that is 27 months away. Who knows by then even England might be competitive again (and being coached by Saint Martin hopefully whilst Sir Clive has taken Man Utd to an FA cup final and lost it due to Chelsea having more men in the lineout?)

[Andydog]

It is 27 months away, but I think that Henry will be able to manage our peaking. I must say I'm very impressed with his coaching. There were a few question marks to start with (remember that flat backline debacle?) but I heard that at the start he gave too much leeway to his assistant coaches. Now he's taken a bit more control and things are really starting to hum. I've heard you slagging him off a few times Havak, what are your current feelings toward him?

I think it was Tony Woodcock who traded punches with White.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
I do wish Clive would shut his gob sometimes – talk of “not understanding the tour” and “wrapped in cotton wool” helps no one to be honest. Suck it up Clive – the better side won.

Yes, he talks as though this is the first time a Lions tour has ever happened. I'd've thought the problems were obvious:

(1) The squad was too large. The likely A team combinations never got enough playing time together.

(2) But even if they had, a lot of them - mainly England players - had been pre-selected anyway, based on past feats and Clive's confidence in them, and they were found wanting. It's not their fault. Wilko shouldn't have toured. Under his circumstances, it was a totally unreasonable demand.

(3) Regardless, at this point in time, as per the fairly crap 6-Nations, rugby in that corner of the world isn't strong. In some part cyclical, but also, probably, related to the stupid amount of rugby they have to play.

(4) And the ABs, at this point in time, are obviously very damn good.

Thus Clive was probably always on a hiding to nothing. His methods only exacerbated an already perilous situation. Thus he makes all the excuses under the sun.

It's also interesting to ponder G Henry's contribution to this ABs' effort. It's not a vastly different team, manpowerwise, to the one left behind by the ex-coach. Carter has matured incredibly in the last season and a half. He was available to the ex-coach, but didn't have the game he has now. So, in a sense, it's a stroke of good fortune and timing for G Henry.

I could mention a few things that will no doubt annoy the Kiwi boys – but I’ll save that for later and just leave it at the fact that they were pretty damn good on Saturday for now.

I'd already read them ad infinitum on the BBC forum.

I guess it is also worrying that Umaga will be 34 in 2007? By conventional wisdom that is too old for a centre?

It's been interesting watching him since his recovery from the WRC knee injury. He's lost some of his speed, part of the ageing process, too, but he's lost none of his strength and guile. If he stays fit, I can see him still being a force in 2007.

He’s pretty good isn’t he – easy to see why Carlos was dispensed with. Shame he is now injured – does that mean Mehrtens?

He's not in the squad, unless they add him. They've added Luke McAlister who seems to be able to play anywhere from 10 to 15.

The running game simply doesn’t work when the opposition are better at it.

Bigger, stronger, more skilled, faster = better.

I see Australia made hard work of their Rugby match –

It was, apparently, as though the teams agreed beforehand to go out and play Sevens. Non-stop running and passing out of their ar*eholes.

and lost some key players to injury including the Centre who has been their best weapon against the ABs recently? Any idea how bad Mortlock’s injury is Finbar? Gregans sounded like just a knock?

They say Mortlock is 50:50 but I'm sure he won't play. Turinui will replace him. There hasn't been any more reference to Gregan so I assume he'll be all right. Nice to see Steve Larkham awarded man of the match by a wide margin. In sublime form, apparently. M'sieur Michalak apparently told everyone to bear Larkham in mind when talking about Carter as the best 10 in the world.

Still, the Boks, this week, won't be playing Sevens.

[Havak]

Seriously? I still think he is a total ****head to be honest - his post match comments were little more mature than Clive's. His behaviour on the 2001 Lions tour was clearly less than mature as too many players have told a similar story about him.

But I have to tell you I rate Wayne Smith pretty highly (he turned Saints around in a very short time) and to a lesser extent also Steve Hansen (who I credit for much of what Henry supposedly did for Wales).

My instincts would actually lead me to believe that the assistant coaches have therefore managed to finally reign in Henry's excesses. The flat back line debacle certainly screams to me of Graham "I am right" Henry pursuing his ideas against all common sense and evidence to the contrary until results forced his hand otherwise.

Did you really think I would change my opinions of him based on two tests?

27 months is a very long time to maintain top dog status. I wish you luck.

[finbar]

All of which answers my musings about G. Henry in the post before!

[Andydog]

Originally posted by Havak
His behaviour on the 2001 Lions tour was clearly less than mature as too many players have told a similar story about him.

To this day, I find it hard to believe the 2001 Lions lost. Despite the Aussies having a good number of world class players throughout the team, I recall their front row stocks were decimated. By the time the first test came around every first choice super 12 prop in Australia was injured. Against the front row that the Lions put out, this tour had disaster written all over it for Aussie. Yet somehow they won..

Plenty of theories have been advanced as to why this happened - as most recently over-training is cited as the key reason - the point being that Woodenhead’s response, which was to under-train, was perhaps equally flawed, possibly even more so. Knowing what I do about Henry I can see a couple of reasons why he would have flogged the 01 Lions on the training pitch.

Firstly - a composite team needs to build combinations and in that regard there is no substitute for hard work. Secondly - team bonds are formed in adversity and hard work should bring a team together (I can't see Henry going for the ice-breaking games and visualisation exercises that Waywood came up with). Third - to beat Australia the Lions basic skill levels had to be high - and they were not. That’s a hard one to address in a short time but Henry had to try.

To do this he had to be tough and he had to be dictatorial. I don't think he would have cared whether the players liked him - just as long as they respected him and if they did dislike him, that could only unite them - because that was what they needed. He expected international rugby players to put the team ahead of themselves - subordinate their egos to the cause, get angry and get on with it.

This is where I think he got it wrong (and where I think he now knows he got it wrong). The English players who dominated the touring party were used to a different style of management. They were used to be able to have their say and became petulant when they didn't get what they wanted. Witness Healey and Dawson - did their public complaints contain anything that a southern hemisphere rugby player would have thought was too unusual? I know my reaction at the time was “what a bunch of prima donnas” - rugby is a team game and if you are going to piss and moan about training hard and not getting picked then bugger off home. Send someone who is prepared to do the work and contribute to a win for the team, even if they don't get on the field. Where I played my club rugby if you didn't get picked for firsts you didn't sulk, you either supported your mates or worked the BBQ or did something else useful. Otherwise you didn't get invited back.

So I guess where I am going with this is that the 01 Lions should probably have won but imploded somewhat. Henry has copped a lot of criticism for this and some of it may be justified. But if his players had the humility and discipline that he was used to in the southern hemisphere (and probably in a young Welsh side) he probably would have won.

Wood**** wanted Henry's job in 01, and has been none too subtle over the years about pointing the finger at Henry for the defeat - but maybe if Clive hadn't established a "soccar culture" amongst the English players, where they became a bunch of petulant prima donnas who thought they were bigger than the team and the coach, I think the Lions may well have won.

It may be unfair to say Woodworm is completely responsible for the Lions defeat this time around - I did think NZ would win, probably 2-1, and injuries to Dallaglio in particular have not helped. But I certainly think the finger of blame for the manner of the defeats can be pointed at him. His management of this tour has been abysmal. However, following the line of thought above, he may also have been a significant factor in the Lions losing in 2001 - where did the English players get the idea that is was acceptable to slag off their teammates and coaches in the media if it was not reflective of the culture that they were used to?

So why does everyone rate Sir Clive - the man did coach a world cup winning team - albeit one that was so much more talented and experienced than the one that they drew with after 80 minutes in the world cup final that it was laughable. I reckon my mum could have nearly coached England to a win in regulation time given the disparity in the forwards (Noriega, Darwin, Finnegan, Kefu, Giffen all out injured or recently injured so that they could not be picked) and Larkam hobbling off injured after a few minutes to be replaced by a very young Giteau (and it showed). They should have been slaughtered.

Lets not forget that he also oversaw the all of the worst defeats ever suffered by England (and now the Lions). No other England coach has ever conceded 50 points. Clive has a couple of times - and on one occasion by a lot (76-0). Choking was elevated to an art form over half a decade of six nations competition - being denied a grandslam by every team in the competition in turn, except Italy, when in each case England should have won in a canter.

He then has the temerity to constantly insist that his team was best, no matter how great the flogging, and if he specifically compliments you after the game its a sure sign you have had a shocker. Ronan O'Gara, Jason Robinson, Jonny Wilkinson on this tour alone. And the last week's exercise against Umaga was a disgrace.

I'm sure the English fans won't be disappointed to see him go to soccer. I really feel for the Lions players and fans who, with the benefit of hindsight, were not even given a chance. Graham Henry, by comparison, has behaved with dignity for four tough years and has done his talking where good coaches should.

Now bring on the tri-nations.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Andydog
Against the front row that the Lions put out, this tour had disaster written all over it for Aussie. Yet somehow they won..

I agree with a lot of what you wrote. But this factor - somehow the Wallabies won - is a very important one. They have a habit of doing it again and again, somehow, against the odds***. It belongs somewhere in the equation.

(***Just as they have the knack of losing matches they should win easily! )

[Andydog]

It's a factor that is greatly admired by all teams. Anyone would be a fool to write off Aussie when Aussie have their backs up against the wall.

[Havak]

Oh it's interesting stuff for sure but I would recommend reading player biographies from those who played in Lions 2001 before painting Mr Henry as a Saint.

I particularly recommend Jonno's book - he has never criticsed any coach he has played for but what he does not say about Henry is as telling as anything he could have said instead.

As as for whining petulant English players I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the scale of that. One player - a total **** named Dawson, criticised Henry in the papers during the tour.

Another player criticised Australians as a whole privately and his press ghost writer stitched him up. Being arrogant as hell he refused to back down. he did also make some references to trainig ground issues between himself and henry but it was only in the later book that he went into any detail.

Sure both were English - but personality not nationality dictated what they did. It was not indicative of having been coached by Clive either - both were uber-arrogant people well before Clive coached England.

A lot of the criticism after the 2001 tour came from Celts from the mid-week team, including the mid week skipper (Welsh). Doesn't really match with the arrogant English idea you are pitching I am afraid.

I also don't understand the point about not burying the Australians in the RWC final - the Aussies played out their skins that day. The Aussies also fielded the same weak as rice paper front row in last years tri-nations and seemed to do quite well at home?

I've also just seen the Lions side for tomorrow - what have poor Cusiter and Murphy done to Clive? Surely they deserve a test spot this time around? He is going to play Peel and Robinson again on Saturday?

Oh and Andydog it is Wales, Ireland, England and Scotland on consecutive weekends in November. I'll be expecting big wins in every game?

[finbar]

Josh Lewsey speaks:

"The way New Zealand play is nothing new - it reminded me of the way England played four or five years ago.

*cough cough* You've spent too long in Clive's presence, Josh.

[LDiCesare]

No, Finbar, he just said that they won. Since England hasn't been doing that for a while, when he sees someone doing it, he thinks it's somewhat familiar, so it can't be completely new.