Lions v New Zealand, 2nd Test, 1/7 8.35AM

irishbucsfan

.ak wrote: »

I can never understand people who get annoyed by kicker's routines. I find it equally amusing and bemusing that someone can get so riled up by a person going through a pre-kick routine.

Its hilarious.

I could understand it if maybe they did a hitler salute or burned the Irish flag as part of the routine.

Buer

Some very petty, bitter people here. Looks like NZ aren't the only losers.

Great game, good win even if they made it insanely difficult on themselves. Losing a man is a funny thing, it can galvanise the team that lose the man and heap pressure on the team that have the advantage. There have been several high profile games where a man was sent off and his team have gone on to win. The Scarlets in the Pro12 semi final and Racing in last season's T14 final are two that immediately spring to mind.

In the 35 minutes where the two teams had the same number of players, the scoreline was 9-8 which is a decent enough representation of the game. The weather was a significant leveller for the game; no side was going to run away with it particularly given how pumped up the Lions were in the opening spells. Some massive hits went in and some guys were stopped dead on the gain line and shunted back.

I think Gatland will have enjoyed a beer after the game. The win, regardless of whether it was against 15 or 14, is a big result for him and history will remember a test win regardless. His selection of Warburton was 100% repaid. The bloke was physical, prominent at the breakdown and showed up well in the line out. It did strike me as clutching at straws a little when people continually identified the line out as an issue due to choosing Warburton over POM. Warburton is no slouch as a jumper. For context, he won more line out ball in the 6N than any Irish player aside from Toner. He's relatively light and 6'3"...he's not as skilled a practitioner as POM but he's a very solid option and was solid there today.

For next week, Gatland absolutely has to retain the Sexton/Farrell axis (not that he'll consider dropping either now). They'll be without SBW now too and their midfield partnership is going to be inexperienced and unfamiliar. The passing options and decoys are going to be big weapons against that inexperience.

The one guy who has to be dropped, without question, is Vunipola. It's difficult to ever say one guy cost his team a match but he did his utmost today with his stupidity. 4 penalties against one guy including a yellow card. If Gatland held the yellow card against Henderson, he should drop Vunipola from the 23. He won't, nor should he but he has to drop to the bench. Liability.

The only other change I'd demand is that Lawes starts. His dynamism and energy was fantastic. AWJ had a good showing penalty aside and brought some serious physicality to the early exchanges but Lawes offers more. It has been a long tour and Lawes will have a full week to recover from his 25 minutes today. He'll be in great shape come next week.

Only interesting thing that struck me was the use of the bench. When the game is on the line, Gatland clearly doesn't trust Webb, Stander, Te'o (how much must that bad decision last week have p*ssed him off) or Nowell.

bilston

Buer wrote: »

Some very petty, bitter people here. Looks like NZ aren't the only losers.

Great game, good win even if they made it insanely difficult on themselves. Losing a man is a funny thing, it can galvanise the team that lose the man and heap pressure on the team that have the advantage. There have been several high profile games where a man was sent off and his team have gone on to win. The Scarlets in the Pro12 semi final and Racing in last season's T14 final are two that immediately spring to mind.

In the 35 minutes where the two teams had the same number of players, the scoreline was 9-8 which is a decent enough representation of the game. The weather was a significant leveller for the game; no side was going to run away with it particularly given how pumped up the Lions were in the opening spells. Some massive hits went in and some guys were stopped dead on the gain line and shunted back.

I think Gatland will have enjoyed a beer after the game. The win, regardless of whether it was against 15 or 14, is a big result for him and history will remember a test win regardless. His selection of Warburton was 100% repaid. The bloke was physical, prominent at the breakdown and showed up well in the line out. It did strike me as clutching at straws a little when people continually identified the line out as an issue due to choosing Warburton over POM. Warburton is no slouch as a jumper. For context, he won more line out ball in the 6N than any Irish player aside from Toner. He's relatively light and 6'3"...he's not as skilled a practitioner as POM but he's a very solid option and was solid there today.

For next week, Gatland absolutely has to retain the Sexton/Farrell axis (not that he'll consider dropping either now). They'll be without SBW now too and their midfield partnership is going to be inexperienced and unfamiliar. The passing options and decoys are going to be big weapons against that inexperience.

The one guy who has to be dropped, without question, is Vunipola. It's difficult to ever say one guy cost his team a match but he did his utmost today with his stupidity. 4 penalties against one guy including a yellow card. If Gatland held the yellow card against Henderson, he should drop Vunipola from the 23. He won't, nor should he but he has to drop to the bench. Liability.

The only other change I'd demand is that Lawes starts. His dynamism and energy was fantastic. AWJ had a good showing penalty aside and brought some serious physicality to the early exchanges but Lawes offers more. It has been a long tour and Lawes will have a full week to recover from his 25 minutes today. He'll be in great shape come next week.

Only interesting thing that struck me was the use of the bench. When the game is on the line, Gatland clearly doesn't trust Webb, Stander, Te'o (how much must that bad decision last week have p*ssed him off) or Nowell.

The Lions needed Murray's control. I'd say if they were still chasing the game in the final 10 minutes Webb would have come on. There was an argument to bring Te'o near the end to nullify the NZ replacement centre.

Crotty may be back next week so they may not be that raw in the midfield.

Bridge93

ScrubsfanChris wrote: »

yohan the great wrote: »

That's two countries mate

Well, England/Scotland/Rep. Of Ireland are countries.
Wales is a principality and Northern Ireland is a provinve/dependant as long as they remain part of the UK

Being a touch pedantic but England and Scotland aren't technically countries

Buer

Watching it again with a bit more scrutiny now. A tad ridiculous that, after the first few showings, Garces tells his TMO and assistants that he believes it's a red. Peyper is clearly reluctant to give it and asks for it to be looked at again. So, it would seem if that happened last week, SBW wouldn't have seen red.

bilston

Buer wrote: »

Watching it again with a bit more scrutiny now. A tad ridiculous that, after the first few showings, Garces tells his TMO and assistants that he believes it's a red. Peyper is clearly reluctant to give it and asks for it to be looked at again. So, it would seem if that happened last week, SBW wouldn't have seen red.

It was great refereeing by Garces. There is no debate, it's a red. SBW may not mean to shoulder Watson in the face, but that's what he does. That Peyper thought otherwise is incredible. But then it ties in with his deference to a couple of AB infractions against us in November.

Synode

bilston wrote: »

It was great refereeing by Garces. There is no debate, it's a red. SBW may not mean to shoulder Watson in the face, but that's what he does. That Peyper thought otherwise is incredible. But then it ties in with his deference to a couple of AB infractions against us in November.

Was it Peyper? Really is incredible that anyone could think it wasn't a red. Zero attempt to wrap and he lead with his shoulder, straight to the head. Red all day long

dubal

It's crystal clear in the laws... No attempt to wrap, penalty, dangerous yellow, neck or head red.

The ref even confirmed all that on the pitch. How an international ref can consider anything else is worrying.

Dubal

Del.Monte

There were no highlights in today's game so I'm putting these up instead.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRo1vWA2mbY

jacothelad

bilston wrote: »

It was great refereeing by Garces. There is no debate, it's a red. SBW may not mean to shoulder Watson in the face, but that's what he does. That Peyper thought otherwise is incredible. But then it ties in with his deference to a couple of AB infractions against us in November.

Sorry Bils, watching it a few times it is clear that he sets himself to do exactly that. Clearly intentional and he deserves a very long ban.

irishman86

BBDBB wrote: »

in sociopolitical terms perhaps, though Wales is a principality if we want to get technical

but in terms of the British & Irish Lions and in rugby terms he is wrong as Im sure you know

Try telling that to any Welshman, this could be one of those rare moments where everyone is kinda right. Which we all ****ing hate :mad:....:pac:

jacothelad

jacothelad wrote: »

Sorry Bils, watching it a few times it is clear that he sets himself to do exactly that. Clearly intentional and he deserves a very long ban.

Only one person knows if it was intentional.

A rugby player would know it's a straight red for an intentional shoulder to the head, so I'd be extremely surprised if they would intentionally do this for no apparent reason, especially considering the situation when it happened.

Buer

jacothelad wrote: »

Sorry Bils, watching it a few times it is clear that he sets himself to do exactly that. Clearly intentional and he deserves a very long ban.

Not sure about him specifically aiming for the face but he intentionally went in to smash his shoulder into Watson and, if it wasn't going to be his face, it was always going to be high and in danger of making contact with the head/neck area.

He should get 6 weeks for it. He has previous. He committed a very similar foul when taking out Quade Cooper in the RWC in 2011.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gPboFZTIkg

irishman86

.ak wrote: »

I can never understand people who get annoyed by kicker's routines. I find it equally amusing and bemusing that someone can get so riled up by a person going through a pre-kick routine.

In this modern day people get wound up about anything. Something to actually get wound up about is kicking style, I want to kill someone every time Barrett takes a kick, lads this day and age who curl the ball shouldnt be let take them. Its not possible to take it consistently that way.

Buer

Basil3 wrote: »

A rugby player would know it's a straight red for an intentional shoulder to the headd.

A rugby union player. That hit absolutely oozed rugby league.

Buer

Synode wrote: »

Was it Peyper? Really is incredible that anyone could think it wasn't a red. Zero attempt to wrap and he lead with his shoulder, straight to the head. Red all day long

Watching it again, I may have done him a disservice. He appears to be accepting of the decision but then asks about the force used. Garces states that it's directly on the head. The TMO offers to show it again and the viewing left Garces in no doubt.

tabby aspreme

Great to see SBW getting caught today, one or two hits like that seem to be part of each AB game and they usually get away with it, his expression while the ref was making his decision tells it all

swiwi_

I'd briefly forgetten that it is a rite of passage for many an Irish man to go to his grave with a grudge to bear and a chip on his shoulder. I admire the tenacity even though it is a throughly unendearing national characteristic. If I'm still on this forum in a few years I imagine Peyper and Dublin will still be mentioned.

You guys won! Just be happy with that. Win or lose, many of you always seem to have something to whine about. This time you won and the Irish lads went pretty well. Be happy about it!

errlloyd

swiwi_ wrote: »

I'd briefly forgetten that it is a rite of passage for many an Irish man to go to his grave with a grudge to bear and a chip on his shoulder. I admire the tenacity even though it is a throughly unendearing national characteristic. If I'm still on this forum in a few years I imagine Peyper and Dublin will still be mentioned.

You guys won! Just be happy with that. Win or lose, many of you always seem to have something to whine about. This time you won and the Irish lads went pretty well. Be happy about it!

You continue to be wise and gracious good sir. It is only the second time in my life that I have seen a team I support beat the ABs. So I do probably have a bigger smile on my face than I would any other single test win in a losing tour.

I can only imagine how frustrating it would be for a Scottish fan - even just one player in the test squad and they may have been able to share in this victory - but they probably can't.

Buer

It's nothing to do with Peyper. If it was Poite, I'd have pointed it out just as readily. A referee being dubious about that sort of incident being worthy of a red card is a discussion point whether it's Peyper in a Lions Vs NZ test or it's a Pro12 novice officiating a game between Zebre and the Dragons.

Nor does it take away whatsoever from a pulsating match.

Hastentoadd

My own tuppence on the match. The call by Garces on the SBW red card was bang on. You could see that the two linesmen were struggling to agree with him but the call was the correct call and it took a bit of balls to make that call. So was impressed with that and his overall refereeing.

To be honest if Beauden Barrett was on song the game should have been put to bed at a very early stage. But he wasn't on song and the Lions won. And credit to them in this.

Positive performances, well Murray and Sexton really did a good job. Negative Warburton, Vunipola, Farrell. I struggle to understand why Farrell takes the penalty kicks over Sexton, as has Halfpenny. Sexton's kicking is rock solid. What is that about other than killing his confidence?

Negative on Gatland was how late he left it to roll out the changes. Post after post at that time suggested the Lions needed to freshen the team, but Gatland didn't. Of course we are all experts after the event but I really thought we needed Teo in shortly after the 50 mark.

I think two things happened towards the end of the game. The ABs simply tired having to play with 14 players and then Sexton started to produce his magic that he is so capable of.

If I were to suggest a team for next weekend it would be with Teo starting (defensively stronger than Farrell) and a Sexton Murray combo.

Yourself isit

Hastentoadd wrote: »

My own tuppence on the match. The call by Garces on the SBW red card was bang on. You could see that the two linesmen were struggling to agree with him but the call was the correct call and it took a bit of balls to make that call. So was impressed with that and his overall refereeing.

To be honest if Beauden Barrett was on song the game should have been put to bed at a very early stage. But he wasn't on song and the Lions won. And credit to them in this.

Positive performances, well Murray and Sexton really did a good job. Negative Warburton, Vunipola, Farrell. I struggle to understand why Farrell takes the penalty kicks over Sexton, as has Halfpenny. Sexton's kicking is rock solid. What is that about other than killing his confidence?

Negative on Gatland was how late he left it to roll out the changes. Post after post at that time suggested the Lions needed to freshen the team, but Gatland didn't. Of course we are all experts after the event but I really thought we needed Teo in shortly after the 50 mark.

I think two things happened towards the end of the game. The ABs simply tired having to play with 14 players and then Sexton started to produce his magic that he is so capable of.

If I were to suggest a team for next weekend it would be with Teo starting (defensively stronger than Farrell) and a Sexton Murray combo.

Farrell was excellent today and he is in fact a better kicker than sexton. Halfpenny is better than both. I don't think sexton cares either.

errlloyd

Hastentoadd wrote: »

Negative on Gatland was how late he left it to roll out the changes. Post after post at that time suggested the Lions needed to freshen the team, but Gatland didn't. Of course we are all experts after the event but I really thought we needed Teo in shortly after the 50 mark.

Just on this. I actually want to defend Gatland. Another coach may have panicked and made changes when Gatland didn't. At about 69 minutes 7 points down he could have hauled Sexton, George and Murray off for Webb, Owens and T'eo - and we may still have won. But Sexton wouldn't have pulled off a brilliant no look deep pop to George on a sumptious line to within yard of the line. Where Farrell, in support from 12 made a great clean out to hold Perenera so that Murray could pick and do what he has now done 4 times against the All Blacks and win the game.

Harsh on the lads. Particularly CJ who probably wants to take home a used test Jersey. But the right call.

Buer

If Te'o was on the field there isn't a hope the first try is scored. I think Gatland got that very right although I did expect him to come on in the last 15.

If he did come on, it was almost certainly Sexton who would be removed. Farrell was kicking very nicely from the tee and wasn't going to be taken off given how tight the score was. Sexton appeared to be a bit banged up too given Farrell was taking the kicks to touch in the closing stages. Sexton was going too well for Gatland to call him ashore though.

Ardillaun

swiwi_ wrote: »

I'd briefly forgetten that it is a rite of passage for many an Irish man to go to his grave with a grudge to bear and a chip on his shoulder. I admire the tenacity even though it is a throughly unendearing national characteristic.

Each country has its own chips to bear. We are not unique in that regard.

Hastentoadd

errlloyd wrote: »

Just on this. I actually want to defend Gatland. Another coach may have panicked and made changes when Gatland didn't. At about 69 minutes 7 points down he could have hauled Sexton, George and Murray off for Webb, Owens and T'eo - and we may still have won. But Sexton wouldn't have pulled off a brilliant no look deep pop to George on a sumptious line to within yard of the line. Where Farrell, in support from 12 made a great clean out to hold Perenera so that Murray could pick and do what he has now done 4 times against the All Blacks and win the game.

Harsh on the lads. Particularly CJ who probably wants to take home a used test Jersey. But the right call.

I know what you say but even if what you say is seen to be successful it is always the wrong call. It is a 23 man team not a 15 man team. I know the result was produced today but you must have faith in the total unit. So it is easy to say Gatland made the right choices in hindsight but I don't think he did. Of course its impossible to prove that.

snowflaker

Is Gatland getting too much credit for a game decided on a SBW brainfart?

snowflaker

snowflaker wrote: »

Is Gatland getting too much credit for a game decided on a SBW brainfart?

No.

Yamanoto

swiwi_ wrote: »

If I'm still on this forum in a few years I imagine Peyper and Dublin will still be mentioned.

PhlegmyMoses

Ardillaun wrote: »

Each country has its own chips to bear. We are not unique in that regard.

Actually, defining something as a national characteristic based on what is said by people motivated enough to post on an online forum is the really hilarious thing here.

On topic, I wonder if Gats will go with Farrell and Sexton next week again. The attacking part is definitely a boon, but it was clear as day that Farrell was being targeted in the 12 channel and got run over a couple of times. You are really hoping that the positives outweigh the negatives.

Del.Monte

snowflaker wrote: »

Is Gatland getting too much credit for a game decided on a SBW brainfart?

A game that the Lions deserved to win but still could have gone either way right to the end - in fact a Draw seemed the most likely outcome towards the last ten minutes.

Hastentoadd

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

Actually, defining something as a national characteristic based on what is said by people motivated enough to post on an online forum is the really hilarious thing here.

On topic, I wonder if Gats will go with Farrell and Sexton next week again. The attacking part is definitely a boon, but it was clear as day that Farrell was being targeted in the 12 channel and got run over a couple of times. You are really hoping that the positives outweigh the negatives.

Farrell was pushed aside and walked over most of the game.

t8010789

As someone who watches rugby from the comfort of my own couch, I found the penalty count extremely frustrating and difficult to watch, the remote nearly found the tv a few times. It would of paid for Warburton to call in his men and give them a quick talking too, if he did? it fell on deaf ears.

Mako had a terrible game but I'm not sure dropping him is the correct thing to do, maybe he should be allowed to right his wrongs.

There were some positive performances and to come out with a win is a good result, regardless that it was against 14 men.

I read a piece about sinkler and how he was loving his time with so many rugby greats. He roomed with best and was bending his ear about all things rugby. I think Rory needs to explain the importance of keeping a cool head as he seemed overly enthusiastic when he came on.

long_b

My favourite moment was when SOB grabbed and held an attacking AB like a calf he was lifting into a trailer

irishman86

snowflaker wrote: »

Is Gatland getting too much credit for a game decided on a SBW brainfart?

Yes, way to much

Burkie1203

t8010789 wrote: »

As someone who watches rugby from the comfort of my own couch, I found the penalty count extremely frustrating and difficult to watch, the remote nearly found the tv a few times. It would of paid for Warburton to call in his men and give them a quick talking too, if he did? it fell on deaf ears.

Murray Kinsella on the42.ie did a live chat on facebook at midday (90 minutes after game). Said Warburton was constantly talking to the players so you would assume there was several speeches at breaks in play about discipline. Cant really blame Warburton for that though. Its been a recurring theme all tour.

The breakdown penalties weren't so bad. It was the stupid ones from Mako which annoyed me.

pickarooney

Basil3 wrote: »

Only one person knows if it was intentional.

A rugby player would know it's a straight red for an intentional shoulder to the head, so I'd be extremely surprised if they would intentionally do this for no apparent reason, especially considering the situation when it happened.

He didn't seem to accept the decision. He mouthed off a bit at the ref before leaving. Strange, I could well accept that he mistimed his charge or wasn't aiming for the head but how could he claim it was a legal challenge or a non-red outcome?

pickarooney

Yamanoto wrote: »

Dennis Bergkamp... Dennis Bergkamp... DENNIS BERGKAMP!!

Teferi

SOB cited for the swinging arm. Anyone got a clip?

Neil3030

Teferi wrote: »

SOB cited for the swinging arm. Anyone got a clip?

Is it the one on Naholo? Not surprised if so.

irishman86

Teferi wrote: »

SOB cited for the swinging arm. Anyone got a clip?

Funny how that was kept very quiet in comparison to SBW on here

FrancieBrady

Teferi wrote: »

SOB cited for the swinging arm. Anyone got a clip?

Thought that might come back to bite.

ThisRegard

irishman86 wrote: »

Funny how that was kept very quiet in comparison to SBW on here

One was a straight out red with the replay shown over and over. The other was not picked up by the ref during play, no replay that I remember, but suspected by a poster or two.

So no, not funny at all.

sydthebeat

Vunipola was more of a ref and I expect him to be cited.

I worry of sob though, it was reviewed by the ref, who thought it was fine, but it can be considered a forearm to the head.

Hopefully just a warning.

Don't give a **** if mako gets a ban

Ardillaun

In the studio, Kirwan looks like he's in a high chair or something compared to Corbisiero and the others. He's huge.

AbusesToilets

Nothing in that SOB incident, joke that he's cited.

Former Former

Very harsh citing but I think he'll be suspended.

Asus X540L

Looks like SOB went for the ball and accidentally head his head

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_EqU1qxf_Q

Buer

Jesus, that will be the single harshest ban I can recall if he gets done for it. I'm not even sure it can be considered a swinging arm. He's wrapping Naholo and makes contact with his head which is only a couple of feet off the ground.

I honestly won't be shocked if he does get suspended as bans can be something of a lottery but, if that's deemed worthy of a red card, then so are multiple incidents. Vunipola lucky not to be cited. Far more in his clear out.

Naholo being concussed is going to be a big factor and will see him banned I reckon. Crying shame and will spoil the final test somewhat.

long_b

Buer wrote: »

Jesus, that will be the single harshest ban I can recall if he gets done for it. I'm not even sure it can be considered a swinging arm. He's wrapping Naholo and makes contact with his head which is only a couple of feet off the ground.

I honestly won't be shocked if he does get suspended as bans can be something of a lottery but, if that's deemed worthy of a red card, then so are multiple incidents. Vunipola lucky not to be cited. Far more in his clear out.

Why does he wrao but then back off?
EDIT: point being made that he was trying to dislodge the ball.

Will make ****e of the last test as a contest if he's suspended.

Would his history come into it as a mitigating factor?
EDIT : He was also suspended during WC