Lions update

by Chris Bertram on June 25, 2005

Well it wasn’t just the selection was it? Those debates had mainly been around the backs, but since the Lions never got near the ball, Henson probably wouldn’t have made much difference. O’Driscoll knackered within 90 seconds was a blow, but the real difference was the ability of the All Blacks both to get the ball and to handle it even in the torrential rain. Will Woodward change the selection? Comments open.

{ 10 comments }

1

Duncan Young 06.25.05 at 6:50 am

The Lions came down with precisely the same shocking lineout that the All Blacks had in the late nineties. Must be contagious.

All-in-all, a good week for New Zealand sport, with Micheal Campbell winning the US Open, a Kiwi on the winning Spurs team, and the schadenfreude of Australia vs. Bangladesh…

Ahhh… the NZ cricket season hasn’t started yet. That explains it.

2

Dave Gwydion 06.25.05 at 7:17 am

Just as predicted; a dire performance an embarrassment to Northern hemispheric rugby. The team to beat the ABs now has to be the following:

Murphy
Thomas (Captain)
Lewsey
Henson
Williams, S
Wilkinson
Peel
Williams
Owen
Jones
Grewcock
OConnell
Jenkins,
Thompson
White

I still think they will lose the next two tests, because Sir Clive’s past it. But at least this team has some flair.

3

Barry 06.25.05 at 7:52 am

Rain? What is this rain that you speak of? I watched the Game on Thursday, and there was no rain visible. What made the difference was Detroit’s lack of field goal hitting, lack of 2-point hitting, and giving the ball to San Antonio. Meanwhile, San Antonio didn’t give up the ball, and shot several field goals.

Honestly, it’s like we were watching different games.

4

Jared 06.25.05 at 8:41 am

Detroit? Lions? Is this a post about football? Or football?

5

alkali 06.25.05 at 8:49 am

It gets harder and harder to follow the “in” crowd’s discussions about the Red Sox.

6

Chris Bertram 06.25.05 at 11:55 am

Not a bad selection Dave Gwydion, but I can’t help feeling that Thompson as hooker doesn’t exactly get us out of the mire. I’d also stick with Martin Corry at no.8. Also can’t see the sense of Shane Williams at centre (you could play Hodgson at fly-half and keep Wilkinson there) – keep him on the bench and bring him on the last quarter maybe.

7

Greg 06.25.05 at 5:46 pm

It does seem the case that if you rely massively on set-piece play, notably the line-out, and your hooker has a bad day, then you’re screwed. Once or twice in the last Six Nations we saw the hitherto almost infallible Shane Byrne have a shocker of a game, and it happened again today…

More evidence that Clive W wasn’t paying attention even when he was present at matches over the last year?

8

Ian Whitchurch 06.25.05 at 5:58 pm

Jared,

They’re talking about rugby union at the moment.

As far as cricket, this is all you need right now ‘That Ash kid can bat’.

Ian Whitchurch

9

Andrew 06.25.05 at 10:22 pm

Occasionally it’s a relief to see the Universe works as intended – team plays very badly, loses horribly.

I have a nasty feeling that the Lions can run any number of permutations from No 10 onwards, and it won’t matter a bit – without players who can convincingly wear the Nos 4 and 5 jerseys, you’re (literally) going backwards.

In retrospect, Sir Clive’s selections have the same flavour as the Bush administration’s actions in the run-up to March 2003. Surely they knew something we didn’t?

Well, maybe not so much.

I dunno. Maybe Jonny will do better at hooker…

10

Phoenician in a time of Romans 06.26.05 at 4:48 am

Hmmm, how do I put this without seeming obnoxious?

“WEEEEEE ARE THE CHAMMMMMMPIONS, MY FRIEEEEEND!!!”

The only thing better than creaming the Poms is creaming the Aussies.

Comments on this entry are closed.