ABs skill levels meant there were minimal knock ons to celebrate222toHounslow wrote:Quite simply, not enough ass slaps, whoops, high fives and loops.
Utter disgrace
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Moderator: Moderators
ABs skill levels meant there were minimal knock ons to celebrate222toHounslow wrote:Quite simply, not enough ass slaps, whoops, high fives and loops.
Utter disgrace
You are very good at this business of "I didn't say XYZ" when your words absolutely imply something without actually using the words. I'll give you this, it is a skill............... well it is if you wish to constantly have the "I didn't say XYZ" as a regular backstop but you know as well as I do that you were suggesting that NZ got away with murder. They didn't and that is all there is to it.bazzaj wrote:I didn't say he favoured any side Bagster it's just you were highlighting the Lions illegality when I saw New Zealand getting away with collapsing mauls coming in from the side, off their feet in rucks particularly on clear out.
Also we are talking a yellow for Teo. an offside pen at a crucial stage in the second half when they were scrambling to prevent a try which was a cynical yellow as you'll see.
That's off the top of my head through a haze of guiness.
As for saying the Lions could win only an idiot would say they can't win.
Theres always a chance.
I learnt that in 1999 when I wrote off an unperforming French sides chances of defeating the All Blacks in a world cup semi.
Never made that mistake since.
A non-moron would understand that "I didn't say XYZ" is a simple construct for indicating repeated examples of "I did not say....", I'm sure you can work the rest out yourself.bazzaj wrote:So what exactly am I accused of saying Bagster?
Xyz??
Do you want me to give you credit for predicting a New Zealand victory at Eden Park?
Its not exactly the stuff of Nostradamus is it?
Spiffy I don't think it would have mattered who coached the Lions. There is not enough talent in the British Isles to have a better than slight hope of beating the All Blacks in their back yard at a stage of the season that suits them. Gatland is in many ways a shrewd coach, but I think he is like some others, too fond of his homeys. I don't think he's the gormless clown you betray. He gives nothing away and talks a mixture of ballix and platitudes as a means of avoiding answering questions.Spiffsson wrote:There is much microanalysis of the first test in particular and of the tour overall. But to take a more general and philosophical look at things - I believed the Lions were doomed the moment Gatland was appointed as coach, and then he in turn appointed Howly at attack coach (joke) and Warburton as captain (another joke - not even the best 7 in Wales and certainly not worth his place on a Test team). With the stultifying and one dimensional tactic of Gatball; poor selection of the squad; the lack of midfield speed, intelligence and footballing ability, the outcome was predictable. A well picked and decently coached Lions squad should be blowing away the midweek opposition consisting mainly of Super Rugby reserves, in their buildup to the test series. This they were unable to do, and wins against the weakened Crusaders and Chiefs brought a false sense of their own worth.
This was dispelled when they met a full-strength, though rusty, New Zealand, who shook off the cobwebs to show them how the game should be played. Despite a few bright moments from the Lions (and one great try), they looked out of their depth. Overall, from that game there is not one Lion I would pick over his NZ counterpart. The anticipated forward domination did not happen. The plodding midfield of Farrell/Teo/Davies was as dull as predicted and unable to put the ball into the hands of the promising Lions back three in enough space to do anything at all.
It is difficult to see what the Lions can do to improve since they don't seem to have the required smarts in the coaching team or on the field. There are too many average players on the squad who are just not up to the NZ level.
Meantime, I believe that NZ will improve and get slicker as the series progresses and, as most of us predicted, complete the whitewash. It is not impossible that the Lions could win one or even two tests, since anything can happen on a rugby field (Ireland did beat NZ last year). But it is extremely unlikely (though I would love to be proved wrong).
Since I was a boy, I have been a massive Lions fan, but have found it difficult to maintain my old enthusiasm for the past couple of tours mostly because of the poor coaching/leadership and the dull approach to playing the game compared with that of earlier squads. I just cannot bear to watch the thick, droning, bumbling, limited Cement Head Gatland, groping for the next word, and talking the same old stupid and endless bolllocks, totally devoid of any rugby intelligence or perception, and instantly swith off the moment he appears.
That is all.
I agree with bits of that Spiffers but not any "anticipated forward domination", not by a long way, that was mainly fevered optimism from Brits for sure but mainly clowns here. That daft notion presupposes that NZ is only the best team in the world by a huge distance because they have the best backline in Europe ........ sorry, the world. They have more or less the best players in the world in every position and if you care to name any player elsewhere who by consensus is better, it will be by the slightest margins.Snipe Watson wrote:Spiffy I don't think it would have mattered who coached the Lions. There is not enough talent in the British Isles to have a better than slight hope of beating the All Blacks in their back yard at a stage of the season that suits them. Gatland is in many ways a shrewd coach, but I think he is like some others, too fond of his homeys. I don't think he's the gormless clown you betray. He gives nothing away and talks a mixture of ballix and platitudes as a means of avoiding answering questions.Spiffsson wrote:There is much microanalysis of the first test in particular and of the tour overall. But to take a more general and philosophical look at things - I believed the Lions were doomed the moment Gatland was appointed as coach, and then he in turn appointed Howly at attack coach (joke) and Warburton as captain (another joke - not even the best 7 in Wales and certainly not worth his place on a Test team). With the stultifying and one dimensional tactic of Gatball; poor selection of the squad; the lack of midfield speed, intelligence and footballing ability, the outcome was predictable. A well picked and decently coached Lions squad should be blowing away the midweek opposition consisting mainly of Super Rugby reserves, in their buildup to the test series. This they were unable to do, and wins against the weakened Crusaders and Chiefs brought a false sense of their own worth.
This was dispelled when they met a full-strength, though rusty, New Zealand, who shook off the cobwebs to show them how the game should be played. Despite a few bright moments from the Lions (and one great try), they looked out of their depth. Overall, from that game there is not one Lion I would pick over his NZ counterpart. The anticipated forward domination did not happen. The plodding midfield of Farrell/Teo/Davies was as dull as predicted and unable to put the ball into the hands of the promising Lions back three in enough space to do anything at all.
It is difficult to see what the Lions can do to improve since they don't seem to have the required smarts in the coaching team or on the field. There are too many average players on the squad who are just not up to the NZ level.
Meantime, I believe that NZ will improve and get slicker as the series progresses and, as most of us predicted, complete the whitewash. It is not impossible that the Lions could win one or even two tests, since anything can happen on a rugby field (Ireland did beat NZ last year). But it is extremely unlikely (though I would love to be proved wrong).
Since I was a boy, I have been a massive Lions fan, but have found it difficult to maintain my old enthusiasm for the past couple of tours mostly because of the poor coaching/leadership and the dull approach to playing the game compared with that of earlier squads. I just cannot bear to watch the thick, droning, bumbling, limited Cement Head Gatland, groping for the next word, and talking the same old stupid and endless bolllocks, totally devoid of any rugby intelligence or perception, and instantly swith off the moment he appears.
That is all.
The All Blacks are the best team in the world by a considerable margin and whatever chance the Lions had in the first test, they were always destined to have next to none in the second and third.
The performance of Kieran Read rips the backside out of the theory that you have to play yourself back in. Maybe that rule only applies to regular world class players.