Lions Predictions 2013

fecking James O'Connor. If he could defend we'd not be one try down at least.

Mogg is a solid player though.
 
fecking James O'Connor. If he could defend we'd not be one try down at least.

Mogg is a solid player though.

We're saying the same things about our 10s and they've both scored..

Great kick Mogg yeah.
 
We're saying the same things about our 10s and they've both scored..

Great kick Mogg yeah.

Yeah O'connor is not a fly half though. He simply cannot defend

Bah feck. awful

We get stuck in this fecking trap of Genia going blindside and just thumping it up the forwards and then we eventually spread it and cough up a mistake. It's pretty dismal.
 
:lol: gg. fecking so close from the Wallabies. Huge guts

Halfpenny is a fecking machine. Superb has deserved this. Defense immense.

Back to the drawing board for the wallabies. All their coached and forced awkward set piece running rugby that is predictable and shite can go and get fecked. feck heads that can't defend and run lines in set pieces and get smashed can feck off as well.
 
:lol: gg. fecking so close from the Wallabies. Huge guts

Halfpenny is a fecking machine. Superb has deserved this. Defense immense.

Back to the drawing board for the wallabies. All their coached and forced awkward set piece running rugby that is predictable and shite can go and get fecked. feck heads that can't defend and run lines in set pieces and get smashed can feck off as well.

I really don't think it's that bad. Your forwards are definitely weak and enough to get munched by the rest of the Southern Hemisphere but you have a lot of creativity in the backs. Just get Quade back.
 
Nothing makes me laugh more when everyone criticises a team sheet, at least let em play first eh?
 
I really don't think it's that bad. Your forwards are definitely weak and enough to get munched by the rest of the Southern Hemisphere but you have a lot of creativity in the backs. Just get Quade back.

There is no point having speed and creativity if they can't defend. If we can't turn over the ball and build momentum and get the ball in good spots then there is no point. Our forwards aren't the worst but they are uncreative and one dimensional.

We're the stoke of Rugby.
 
There is no point having speed and creativity if they can't defend. If we can't turn over the ball and build momentum and get the ball in good spots then there is no point. Our forwards aren't the worst but they are uncreative and one dimensional.

We're the stoke of Rugby.


Now you are being unfair to yourself. Stoke don't have flair and creativity. Think more Wigan Athletic.
 
This is what I was expecting for the whole series, not just the final match. Anyway, I think this lions squad is much better than the wallabies, deserved series victory.

It's the lions first tour victory since 1997 which is good too. You don't want something like the lions losing their aura if they continued to lose.
 
Was an entertaining game and series, Lions easily deserved to win the series, just a far stronger team
 
Is that the players or the coach? Sky saying his job will be under threat.


feck his job has been under threat for two years. The world cup he should have gone.

It goes deepeer than that though. Off the back of a Lions tour (the sporadic nature of it) I don't really think you should be sacked. If we fail to make an impact in the 4 nations and/or look close to winning the Bledisloe then he should go. But in truth like I said he's been shite for years.

We play this weird set piece style league running game where you just throw it wide and run lines and hope to make a break. Nobody actually runs at the line with power and purpose when we choose to go wide. We haven't had a natural smart all-round fly half since Larkham and inconsistent clowns like Giteau who think they are superstars until they finally get dropped are what the main problem is.

No naturally talented 'gifted' rugby players. Just all athletes who then try to move into the 'system' and play like robots. None of our forwards are smart and creative, none of our backline play is ever broken and dangerous. Genia coming through right now is the best scrum half we've had since Gregan and we can't put together a fecking no10 to play with him or a bunch of able forwards to protect him. I can probably count the number of turnovers from our backs in the last 5 years on a single hand.

edit: I will say though we missed Pocock badly. At one stage was getting called 'McCaw Jr.' by kiwi fans. His ability as an openside flanker is even better than Smith was at his peak.

Was an entertaining game and series, Lions easily deserved to win the series, just a far stronger team
A game of fine lines. Could have been done and dusted had Beale stepped up and kicked that 'kickable' shot at goal. But I agree anyway matched up in a one of test the Lions are just far stronger and far more able all the way across the park.
 
Can you knight someone who is still playing? Sir Leigh Halfpenny. Lions were fecking unbelievable.
 
Glad the Lions won, it doesn't make Gatland's team selection correct though. It was obviously wrong before the match and it's still obviously wrong. It wasn't the centres that won the game for the Lions, it was more the deficiencies of the Australians. Still, I'm sure that will be ignored and lazy pundits will say Gatland had been proven right.
 
Sully, the result is what matters and so he was right. Any more dissent on the matter is just hot air.

How does the result prove he was right to drop O'Driscoll though? It seemed to me that we won because our scrum was good, their scrum was terrible and Halfpenny was brilliant yet again. The way the game played out meant that O'Driscoll being there was a non issue, that doesn't mean it was the right call though. Obviously the result is what matters in the end, that doesn't mean we can't still be critical of aspects of the way Gatland managed the tour. We won well today but I still think the team could have been even better over the three games. Just my opinion, of course.
 
How does the result prove he was right to drop O'Driscoll though? It seemed to me that we won because our scrum was good, their scrum was terrible and Halfpenny was brilliant yet again. The way the game played out meant that O'Driscoll being there was a non issue, that doesn't mean it was the right call though. Obviously the result is what matters in the end, that doesn't mean we can't still be critical of aspects of the way Gatland managed the tour. We won well today but I still think the team could have been even better over the three games. Just my opinion, of course.

I'm going to have to disagree with you there. The first series win in sixteen years, a record points score, and a breathtaking display of rugby prowess... I'm gonna have to say Gatland was 100% utterly vindicated. I do not see what BOD would have offered that would have made things any better. That's not to say I don't rate BOD as a player -- I honestly do -- but it was the right tactical call. Boy, was it.
 
I'm going to have to disagree with you there. The first series win in sixteen years, a record points score, and a breathtaking display of rugby prowess... I'm gonna have to say Gatland was 100% utterly vindicated. I do not see what BOD would have offered that would have made things any better. That's not to say I don't rate BOD as a player -- I honestly do -- but it was the right tactical call. Boy, was it.

Like I said, the way thing went O' Driscoll not being there didn't make a difference (though I wouldn't have thought his selection would have reduced the level of performance either). Imagine if the Australian scrum hadn't collapsed though, then we would've been in a situation where it might have made a difference. The problem with not selecting O'Driscoll (or having him on the bench) was that we didn't have a plan B if thing went wrong. As it happened, we didn't need that plan B. That doesn't mean it wasn't a mistake.

I supposed I'm biased in that I'm Irish, I genuinely don't think that's influencing my opinion here though. For example, I'm happy to admit Gatland made the right call in leaving Heaslip out and I didn't think Murray had necessarily done enough to start either. Not having BOD in the squad was a mistake though, one that might have been punished in other circumstances.

Generally speaking I don't agree with the idea that results vindicate all decisions. I think that's too black and white, mistakes can be made without changing the result. Like Iike I said, it's just my opinion. I'm sure I'm in the minority as most will say Gatland managed the tour brilliantly.