BRITISH AND IRISH LIONS 2021

What do you think? You can have your say by posting below.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021:07:11:14:57:38 by P G Tips.

[www.theguardian.com] - "Lions Will Miss 16th Man" - Gold

Another great preview, thanks PG

Is the Lions warm up game being televised? I can’t find it anywhere..

Sky Main and 407

Quite a lot of talk about how Gatlands selections would make Jones selections, or lack of, look silly.

Right now its looking like not playing Daly at 13 for the past three seasons is Jones biggest mistake rather than ignoring Sam Simmonds.

Quote:

HappySaracen
Quite a lot of talk about how Gatlands selections would make Jones selections, or lack of, look silly.
Right now its looking like not playing Daly at 13 for the past three seasons is Jones biggest mistake rather than ignoring Sam Simmonds.

I don’t think you will find anyone on here that would back Eddie on moving him to 15.

He did it at the expense of a specialist 15 and to keep JJ originally. A mistake.


Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Quote:

HappySaracen
Quite a lot of talk about how Gatlands selections would make Jones selections, or lack of, look silly.
Right now its looking like not playing Daly at 13 for the past three seasons is Jones biggest mistake rather than ignoring Sam Simmonds.

The biggest question mark over Daly at 13 is his defence - that question won't been answered until it's actually been tested.
Even if answered in the positive; there's no guarantee that he'd be better there than Slade, or 2017 JJ.

Daly was never a FB, but he did reach world class on the wing, it was then a matter of fitting Daly, May and Watson into the same back 3; with lots of questions from non-Bath fans as to whether Watson could actually play FB

A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything

RAEBURN SHIELD

Quote:

Which Tyler
The biggest question mark over Daly at 13 is his defence - that question won't been answered until it's actually been tested

That's a very good point. My observation is when used as the blitzing defender he is incredibly effective. He's not going to smash the attacker but he'll close down the space and make a tackle. It's in slower play with more direct options that he has struggled in the past.

Quote:

Which Tyler
Daly was never a FB, but he did reach world class on the wing, it was then a matter of fitting Daly, May and Watson into the same back 3; with lots of questions from non-Bath fans as to whether Watson could actually play FB

I agree hes played well on the wing but these days you need FB skills across the back three against the best which being solid in the air something that has never been the strongest part of his game. Watson is an odd one. He's absolutely a starter for me for England and probably the Lions too but whenever I've seen him at FB he's never felt like he's adding something extra there. I think I'd prefer him kept on the wing with a licence to roam. That seems where you get the most out of his considerable talent,

Hamish Watson was a monster IMHO - He has consistently performed at a level this season that if he was wearing a black shirt with a fern on it we would be calling him the best open side in the world. As good a performance as I have seen in a long time - says a lot that he was given Player of the Match over a player scoring 4 tries.

Good start from the Lions - the scrum appeared a bit of a lottery which is a bit of concern given they played the weakest of the SA sides (but then is there a weak SA pack???)

Finn Russell offers a complete opposite to Biggar - Gatland must be pinching himself to have 2 10's offering 2 completely different games - exactly what you want - the need to completely change the game. Greenwood definitely nailed his colours to the Russell post absolutely "crooning" over him.

All in all an excellent start and more importantly appeared no injuries.

I've just discovered that the Lions tour is being covered here under my regular Rugby Pass. I am a very happy bunny.

... IMHO, of course.

Now in Honolulu

[quote HappySaracen][quote Which Tyler]The biggest question mark over Daly at 13 is his defence - that question won't been answered until it's actually been tested[/quote]

That's a very good point. My observation is when used as the blitzing defender he is incredibly effective. He's not going to smash the attacker but he'll close down the space and make a tackle. It's in slower play with more direct options that he has struggled in the past.
[/quote]

I don't think you need to play someone at the position to learn if they can defend there if you are observing them in coaching every week.

Interestingly the comparison at 13 is with Slade, who is also defensively fragile.


[quote Which Tyler]Daly was never a FB, but he did reach world class on the wing, it was then a matter of fitting Daly, May and Watson into the same back 3; with lots of questions from non-Bath fans as to whether Watson could actually play FB[/quote]
I agree hes played well on the wing but these days you need FB skills across the back three against the best which being solid in the air something that has never been the strongest part of his game. Watson is an odd one. He's absolutely a starter for me for England and probably the Lions too but whenever I've seen him at FB he's never felt like he's adding something extra there. I think I'd prefer him kept on the wing with a licence to roam. That seems where you get the most out of his considerable talent,[/quote]

I think Ant is better fit on the wing. His acceleration and balance seems especially suited to beat a cover defender in a small area and I don't think there are really many as good as him. On the wing he invariably beats the first man.

He'll get less touches on the wing, which is a missed opportunity, but as long as he gets the ball at speed then teams struggle with him out wide.

I think the Lions have picked their starting backs for the next game except for Henshaw and Murray.

[www.bbc.co.uk] - SA Isolating for 2nd Time in 8 Days

Quote:

Mike the Taxi
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/57724192 - SA Isolating for 2nd Time in 8 Days

Seems a little irresponsible to go ahead with this series given the state SA is in with covid.

Agree OB, and particularly without fans in the stands.

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

@theBear
As you say I'm sure that Gatland will have taken a view on whether he can defend there otherwise he wouldn't be about to enjoy his second run-out at 13 but until the first time he gets one of the SA forwards running straight at him I'm not sure we really know?
Agree about Watson. He's class on the wing and the onus should be on the team (Lions, England, Bath) to get the ball to him more. Also tbf he comes off his wing quite a lot.

Quote:

OutsideBath
Seems a little irresponsible to go ahead with this series given the state SA is in with covid.

How bad does it have to get before someone pulls the plug? pretty bad I'd say considering the money involved. Just have to hope everyone is alright. No cases for the Lions yet so is it just about one side taking things more seriously or just bad luck?

Quote:

Ali1969
Finn Russell offers a complete opposite to Biggar - Gatland must be pinching himself to have 2 10's offering 2 completely different games - exactly what you want - the need to completely change the game

I'm never entirely convinced by this as a tactic/concept. Players/teams need a certain amount of flexibility in-built in order to adapt to the match situation, more than they need someone who can change the entire dynamic. And how often does a team need to do a complete 180-degree? The Lions are very unlikely to find themselves 20 points down at any point - the team is too full of quality for that to happen.

It's much more likely that they go into the final 15-20 minutes within 5-8 points either way. In which case, you've still got to decide whether your most reliable goalkicker is the person you want on the pitch going into the final quarter.

And what happens if your steady gameplan is working pretty well, but Biggar, say, gets injured after 30 minutes? Would you prefer to have a like-for-like - Farrell, say - on the bench, so you can carry on as before?

Of course, you can't cover every permutation of eventualities. But I always think that picking a player on the bench just in case you've got it horribly wrong from the start is verging on the negative.

Quote:

HappySaracen
@theBear
As you say I'm sure that Gatland will have taken a view on whether he can defend there otherwise he wouldn't be about to enjoy his second run-out at 13 but until the first time he gets one of the SA forwards running straight at him I'm not sure we really know?
Agree about Watson. He's class on the wing and the onus should be on the team (Lions, England, Bath) to get the ball to him more. Also tbf he comes off his wing quite a lot.

I don't know if Gatland thinks Daly is a strong defender or whether given the players around him he could ameliorate any shortcomings. Both are fine in a tactical but it's not like he needs to play at 13 for people to make that decision.

And yeah I agree, Ant does come off his wing a good amount and he should. I think the thing with Ant is that 5m away from a defender who can't line him up there aren't many better.

Hard to tell how the Lions will play, or how SA will let them play, but England are criminal at squandering their wide talents.

I actually don't think that Daly is a bad defender when he gets someone running at him in a tight space. It's that he finds himself in not great positions at 15, gets flat footed and can't recover to make a 1 on 1 tackle against an opponent who is trying to avoid him. At 13 I'm sure he will be fine.

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Daly is OK on the outside but is pretty weak on the inside, flailing arm syndrome, he just isn't a 15 as you say.


Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

[www.bbc.co.uk]

British and Irish Lions 2021: Tour game against Vodacom Bulls called off after Covid cases

I fear that this tour is turning into a bit of a farce. S.A. won't have played any games, the country is deeply in the grip of Covid, no fans in the stadia etc.

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

I agree. It is turning into a bit of a farce. The option to hold it in the Isles was not taken. I hope it either gets played out in full or called off now. It would be terrible if they played 1 test which finished really close and then the tour had to be stopped.

Quote:

cb2
I agree. It is turning into a bit of a farce. The option to hold it in the Isles was not taken. I hope it either gets played out in full or called off now. It would be terrible if they played 1 test which finished really close and then the tour had to be stopped.

Completely agree, are we paying a full-strength SA side or a Covid modified one? Tells us nothing.


Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Quote:

cb2
It would be terrible if they played 1 test which finished really close and then the tour had to be stopped.

It's only a game of rugby. It would matter, but only in the sense of the circumstances behind it, not because a bunch of lads had to come home without getting to play their ruggers.

Compared to what's gone in these past 18 months, you're correct but there is a danger of it turning into a farce and tainting the Lions brand. Either by having weakened sides on the pitch or ones without the correct preparation.

[www.bbc.co.uk]

That's not good, but not not a massive surprise.

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Time to come home.

More testing of players to come and kick off pushed back to 7pm. If the match goes ahead it will overlap with the Euro semi final, so won’t get the same kind of audience as might have been banked on….

Tonight’s match goes ahead, but major changes to the previously announced team due to more players being required to isolate. Good luck to them and all those that are affected by COVID.

Quote:

cb2
Time to come home.

+1

Whilst it's an honour for the players to play in a Lions tour and it would be a shame for them to miss out, however with no fans it's not going to be the same anyway.

Yes, looks like Ant W is one of them.

The British & Irish Lions can confirm that a player and a member of the Lions management team has tested positive for COVID-19 following PCR testing as part of the Tour screening programme which took place on Wednesday 7 July.

The two individuals had a total of 12 close contacts – eight players and four staff members – all of who have been placed into isolation at the team hotel.

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Changed lineup leading 14-0 after 6 minutes.

PG

HT

0 v 26

This is a really strong Lions squad, very difficult to pick a starting 15 from it.

Some suggestion that weaknesses in SA domestic rugby starting to show after years of players and coaches de-camping to better-paid climes?

Could be Opti, but no Springboks or Bok squad members playing in Provincial teams.

It has always been the case that the step up to test level was greater in SA than NZ or Oz, but current restrictions have exaggerated that.

A full strength Boks remain a daunting prospect.

PG

Lions playing Sharks again this weekend.

[www.bbc.co.uk]

"The choice of the Cell C Sharks was dictated by the fact that they have been in a bubble, have returned negative tests throughout and were prepared to take on the fixture," said SA Rugby chief Jurie Roux.

"No other team in the country could meet those conditions right now - without going into a five-day lockdown.

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Theoretically that should be good for the Lions in terms of getting some more game time to see players/combinations. Although it will be interesting to see if they can actually field the players/combination they want to see due to their own isolating people!

Quote:

dcsh
Although it will be interesting to see if they can actually field the players/combination they want to see due to their own isolating people!

it is being reported that it was actually a false positive so the players can come out of isolation if that player tests negative again tomorrow.

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Yup spotted that the report said that about the player. But not the member of staff, so some players could still need to isolate if they were their close contacts.

Hope not obviously, at this rate there could be players who don't get a game and don't get to see South Africa either...not what they dreamed of when they got the call up!

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Report in the Guardian says some players chose not to be vaccinated. Un-****-believable that they were allowed to join the tour. They should be sent home.

If that is true, it is an unbelievable risk, knowing where they were going!

PG

Imagine if the Lions tour comes crashing down because some members of the tour party - playing or otherwise - chose not to get vaccinated. It will make the Robshaw/deGlanville Barbarians idiocy look like financial small fry.

The alternative is stipulating no jab no tour. If we can't even decide that for our health care workers making it compulsory for a Lions tour is going to be a big stretch.


Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

That would, IMHO, have been a perfectly reasonable stipulation. Successful Lions tours are built on team spirit.

A Covid vaccination has more than one purpose - inoculating the subject, but also limiting the spread of infection. to me, consideration for your team mates should be a given.

PG

A massive plus 1 from me PGT.

On what grounds do you justify not having a vaccination? That you believe it will do you more harm than good? You're happy for others to take the 'risk', but you're not?

Vaccinations are basically modern medicine/science. Anyone who goes on a Lions tour not believing in modern medicine/science should be told that they won't be getting any modern medical/scientific support at all. Take it or leave it.

Frankly, even if you have a medical exemption from taking the vaccination you shouldn't be on that tour.

Quote:

Optimist
A massive plus 1 from me PGT.
On what grounds do you justify not having a vaccination? That you believe it will do you more harm than good? You're happy for others to take the 'risk', but you're not?

Vaccinations are basically modern medicine/science. Anyone who goes on a Lions tour not believing in modern medicine/science should be told that they won't be getting any modern medical/scientific support at all. Take it or leave it.

Frankly, even if you have a medical exemption from taking the vaccination you shouldn't be on that tour.

You are absolutely right Opti, however, stipulating vaccine or no selection is almost inevitably going to open rugby to a legal challenge. Its never going to happen.

Its infringement of work practices potentially. Given some of Exeter's players stance on vaccines can you see that happening.

If we can't enforce our nurses to jab when they are working with the most sickly parts of the population there is no chance for a ports tour!


Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Watson to start on Saturday.

PG

Quote:

shipwrecked

Quote:

Optimist
A massive plus 1 from me PGT.
On what grounds do you justify not having a vaccination? That you believe it will do you more harm than good? You're happy for others to take the 'risk', but you're not?

Vaccinations are basically modern medicine/science. Anyone who goes on a Lions tour not believing in modern medicine/science should be told that they won't be getting any modern medical/scientific support at all. Take it or leave it.

Frankly, even if you have a medical exemption from taking the vaccination you shouldn't be on that tour.

You are absolutely right Opti, however, stipulating vaccine or no selection is almost inevitably going to open rugby to a legal challenge. Its never going to happen.

Its infringement of work practices potentially. Given some of Exeter's players stance on vaccines can you see that happening.

If we can't enforce our nurses to jab when they are working with the most sickly parts of the population there is no chance for a ports tour!

Assuming this is from Lions? Surely Gatland can select who he wants i.e. the ones he wants who have been vaccinated.

Quote:

woodpecker

Quote:

shipwrecked

Quote:

Optimist
A massive plus 1 from me PGT.
On what grounds do you justify not having a vaccination? That you believe it will do you more harm than good? You're happy for others to take the 'risk', but you're not?

Vaccinations are basically modern medicine/science. Anyone who goes on a Lions tour not believing in modern medicine/science should be told that they won't be getting any modern medical/scientific support at all. Take it or leave it.

Frankly, even if you have a medical exemption from taking the vaccination you shouldn't be on that tour.

You are absolutely right Opti, however, stipulating vaccine or no selection is almost inevitably going to open rugby to a legal challenge. Its never going to happen.

Its infringement of work practices potentially. Given some of Exeter's players stance on vaccines can you see that happening.

If we can't enforce our nurses to jab when they are working with the most sickly parts of the population there is no chance for a ports tour!

Assuming this is from Lions? Surely Gatland can select who he wants i.e. the ones he wants who have been vaccinated.

How would you know Woody, as soon as you ask you are discriminating aren't you?


Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Quote:

shipwrecked

Quote:

woodpecker

Quote:

shipwrecked

Quote:

Optimist
A massive plus 1 from me PGT.
On what grounds do you justify not having a vaccination? That you believe it will do you more harm than good? You're happy for others to take the 'risk', but you're not?

Vaccinations are basically modern medicine/science. Anyone who goes on a Lions tour not believing in modern medicine/science should be told that they won't be getting any modern medical/scientific support at all. Take it or leave it.

Frankly, even if you have a medical exemption from taking the vaccination you shouldn't be on that tour.

You are absolutely right Opti, however, stipulating vaccine or no selection is almost inevitably going to open rugby to a legal challenge. Its never going to happen.

Its infringement of work practices potentially. Given some of Exeter's players stance on vaccines can you see that happening.

If we can't enforce our nurses to jab when they are working with the most sickly parts of the population there is no chance for a ports tour!

Assuming this is from Lions? Surely Gatland can select who he wants i.e. the ones he wants who have been vaccinated.

How would you know Woody, as soon as you ask you are discriminating aren't you?

There is some misunderstanding here about what constitutes discrimination. It isn't discrimination for Gatland to not pick me because I'm not good enough at rugby, it isn't discrimination for him not to pick someone good enough who plays a different style to what he's looking for, it isn't discrimination to pick a player who tends not to get on with their team mates and it isn't discrimination to not pick a player who chooses not to have a vaccination.

Discrimination is the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, sex, or disability.

Quote:

JFPC

Quote:

shipwrecked

Quote:

woodpecker

Quote:

shipwrecked

Quote:

Optimist
A massive plus 1 from me PGT.
On what grounds do you justify not having a vaccination? That you believe it will do you more harm than good? You're happy for others to take the 'risk', but you're not?

Vaccinations are basically modern medicine/science. Anyone who goes on a Lions tour not believing in modern medicine/science should be told that they won't be getting any modern medical/scientific support at all. Take it or leave it.

Frankly, even if you have a medical exemption from taking the vaccination you shouldn't be on that tour.

You are absolutely right Opti, however, stipulating vaccine or no selection is almost inevitably going to open rugby to a legal challenge. Its never going to happen.

Its infringement of work practices potentially. Given some of Exeter's players stance on vaccines can you see that happening.

If we can't enforce our nurses to jab when they are working with the most sickly parts of the population there is no chance for a ports tour!

Assuming this is from Lions? Surely Gatland can select who he wants i.e. the ones he wants who have been vaccinated.

How would you know Woody, as soon as you ask you are discriminating aren't you?

There is some misunderstanding here about what constitutes discrimination. It isn't discrimination for Gatland to not pick me because I'm not good enough at rugby, it isn't discrimination for him not to pick someone good enough who plays a different style to what he's looking for, it isn't discrimination to pick a player who tends not to get on with their team mates and it isn't discrimination to not pick a player who chooses not to have a vaccination.

Discrimination is the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, sex, or disability.

You may well be right but it depends why you are not getting vaccinated surely! There are multiple reasons for that, health conditions, allergies, (disability), religious reasons.

If there is no issue why hasn't vaccination been made mandatory in the UK?


Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Quote:

shipwrecked

Quote:

JFPC

Quote:

shipwrecked

Quote:

woodpecker

Quote:

shipwrecked

Quote:

Optimist
A massive plus 1 from me PGT.
On what grounds do you justify not having a vaccination? That you believe it will do you more harm than good? You're happy for others to take the 'risk', but you're not?

Vaccinations are basically modern medicine/science. Anyone who goes on a Lions tour not believing in modern medicine/science should be told that they won't be getting any modern medical/scientific support at all. Take it or leave it.

Frankly, even if you have a medical exemption from taking the vaccination you shouldn't be on that tour.

You are absolutely right Opti, however, stipulating vaccine or no selection is almost inevitably going to open rugby to a legal challenge. Its never going to happen.

Its infringement of work practices potentially. Given some of Exeter's players stance on vaccines can you see that happening.

If we can't enforce our nurses to jab when they are working with the most sickly parts of the population there is no chance for a ports tour!

Assuming this is from Lions? Surely Gatland can select who he wants i.e. the ones he wants who have been vaccinated.

How would you know Woody, as soon as you ask you are discriminating aren't you?

There is some misunderstanding here about what constitutes discrimination. It isn't discrimination for Gatland to not pick me because I'm not good enough at rugby, it isn't discrimination for him not to pick someone good enough who plays a different style to what he's looking for, it isn't discrimination to pick a player who tends not to get on with their team mates and it isn't discrimination to not pick a player who chooses not to have a vaccination.

Discrimination is the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, sex, or disability.

You may well be right but it depends why you are not getting vaccinated surely! There are multiple reasons for that, health conditions, allergies, (disability), religious reasons.

If there is no issue why hasn't vaccination been made mandatory in the UK?

The key word is chooses.

My daughter chooses not to get a driving licence. I respect her right not to apply for it. I would not expect her to get a job that involves driving. Rugby is a collision sport, and so is involves lots of close contact, bodily fluid exchange, etc, etc. Surely, therefore, choosing to play it assumes rights and responsibilities way beyond those of the general public.

but then, I'm living in a country which has told anyone who wants to remain in their job to get vaccinated (the Guardian may not like it - but makes sense to me). You have a right to remain unvaccinated - but that right comes with restrictions. Its your choice.

OBinFiji

Quote:

OBinFiji
You have a right to remain unvaccinated - but that right comes with restrictions. Its your choice.
OBinFiji

Its an interesting question whether those choosing to be vaccinated were asked whether they were happy to travel with those unvaccinated? I'd hope they were at least informed and with the Lions taking no party line I guess the decision was you don't tour if you're unprepared to be exposed to those who won't take the vaccine. I'd have said you don't get vaccinated you don't tour.

Quote:

HappySaracen

Quote:

OBinFiji
You have a right to remain unvaccinated - but that right comes with restrictions. Its your choice.
OBinFiji

Its an interesting question whether those choosing to be vaccinated were asked whether they were happy to travel with those unvaccinated? I'd hope they were at least informed and with the Lions taking no party line I guess the decision was you don't tour if you're unprepared to be exposed to those who won't take the vaccine. I'd have said you don't get vaccinated you don't tour.

I understand the position and the view but does that extend to the UK as a whole? We haven't made it mandatory in society even where lives might be at risk. Why should it be mandatory where sport is concerned?

They could have made it 'strongly recommended' but as far as I know there has been no stance on it at all. Perhaps endangering the tour is too financially risky.


Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Quote:

shipwrecked
I understand the position and the view but does that extend to the UK as a whole? We haven't made it mandatory in society even where lives might be at risk. Why should it be mandatory where sport is concerned?

Yup that's fair which is what I basically said. The Lions haven't taken a view so as long as all players were informed it would be up to a vaccinated player to take themselves out of the bubble.

My view is certainly not the popular one but tbh too many people talk about society but behave from an individual basis. When they're the only person or group that impacts thats absolutely no issue. When their choice impacts people who have made a decision to vaccinate I think it becomes an issue.

Marcus Smith called up to the Lions !


Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Quote:

shipwrecked
Marcus Smith called up to the Lions !

Congratulations to him, he has had a hell of a season. But poor old George Ford…

You would have to think that WG had Smith in mind over Ford all along though wouldn't you.


Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Cover for Finn Russell (Achilles) according to Beeb - [www.bbc.co.uk]

Sharks red card in 2nd half, after drawn 1st half

A couple of handy looking lummoxes in the Sharks' 2nd row... Just sayin'.

Even AW gets in on the try-fest

Absolutely gutted for George Ford - very strange decision. Equally strange was Eddie Jones not pulling him from an absolutely meaningless England 3rds game when he learned of Smith’s call-up on a Friday.

Quote:

Optimist
Absolutely gutted for George Ford - very strange decision.

A player bang in form off the back of a great Premiership win who has played a series of tough finals games, followed by being in England camp and playing a couple of tests, who currently plays in a similar way to the player the Lions attack coach has apparently built a fair bit of the Lions attack round, oh and he's been in a bubble of one sort of another for the majority of the last couple of months.

V

A player in decent form who had an unspecified injury at the end of the season but was then declared by his DoR to have been fit enough to play if needed, who was passed over by his International coach and has probably (although not certainly given his professionalism) not been following a strict bubble protocol or training to match day standards over the past month.

Honestly Opti I know you really like Ford but it really isn't that strange a call and the logic for it may even be as simple as Ford genuinely having an injury that isn't sorted yet or the issue of him having to quarantine before joining the squad.

Quote:

Optimist
Absolutely gutted for George Ford - very strange decision. Equally strange was Eddie Jones not pulling him from an absolutely meaningless England 3rds game when he learned of Smith’s call-up on a Friday.

According to the Tigs board, Ford Is managing a long term leg injury and is not fit to be selected. I'd agree with your second point except this is Eddie Jones we're talking about so we can have no expectation of any concern for player welfare or interests. The man's an ar$e.

... IMHO, of course.

Now in Honolulu



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021:07:11:02:00:12 by joethefanatic.

There are certainly mixed messages about that Joe as Borthwick said after one of the games at the end of the season that Ford could have played "if needed"
Given Tigers weren't really playing for anything and Ford sounds like he's managing an injury I guess the plan was to let him get an early rest/ahead of the rehab curve.

I've removed the "sticky" from this thread. If all matches are played it could get unreasonably long!

Perhaps someone would like to create a match thread for the next game?

PG