So 40 players, who's in?

[Stom]

With 40 to pick, who will Gatland take?

Fill in the blanks

Hartley
Best
Owens

Mako
Dickinson
McGrath

Cole
Lee
Nel

AWJ
Charteris
Itoje
Gray
Gray
(Henderson)
(Kruis)
(Launchbury) This is the toughest slot...

Warburton
Robshaw
Lydiate
Faletau
BillyV
Heaslip
(Stander)

Murray
Webb
(Davies)
(Youngs, shudder)

Biggar
Sexton
Farrell
(Ford)

Roberts
JDavies
Joseph
Tuilagi
Henshaw
Payne
Scott

North
Trimble
Watson
LWilliams
Halfpenny*

[Adder]

Fill in the blanks

Hartley
Best
Owens

Mako
Dickinson
McGrath

Cole
Lee
Nel

AWJ
Charteris
Itoje
Gray
Gray
(Henderson)
(Kruis)
(Launchbury) This is the toughest slot...

Warburton
Robshaw
Lydiate
Faletau
BillyV
Heaslip
(Stander)

Murray
Webb
(Davies)
(Youngs, shudder)
Laidlaw if Gatland fancies his kicking game

Biggar
Sexton
Farrell
(Ford)
Finn Russel If exceptional season

Roberts
JDavies
Joseph
Tuilagi
Henshaw
Payne
ScottToo slow IMO
Bennett if Gatland decides against GATBall

North
Trimble
Watson
LWilliams
Halfpenny*
Hogg
Seymour

[Digby]

40 players would be a bump to the last tour, and both lists so far are for more than 40 players anyway.

I think they might take 38 so as they can include 3 10s from the off, Hogg playing as a 10 on the last tour was absurd and you certainly wouldn't want that Vs some decent sides.

The 38 breaking down as

3 Hookers
6 Props
5 Locks
5 Flankers
2 Number 8s

3 scrumhalves
3 flyhavles
4 centres
4 wingers
3 fullbacks

Taking more is an issue, partly it's not easy to get games in a squad of 38, it's harder to sort training, and partly the more you take the less each player gets paid

[Stom]

40 players would be a bump to the last tour, and both lists so far are for more than 40 players anyway.

I think they might take 38 so as they can include 3 10s from the off, Hogg playing as a 10 on the last tour was absurd and you certainly wouldn't want that Vs some decent sides.

The 38 breaking down as

3 Hookers
6 Props
5 Locks
5 Flankers
2 Number 8s

3 scrumhalves
3 flyhavles
4 centres
4 wingers
3 fullbacks

Taking more is an issue, partly it's not easy to get games in a squad of 38, it's harder to sort training, and partly the more you take the less each player gets paid

From the Granuiad

He is also planning to take up to 40 players

[Digby]

If 40 players then maybe add one to the centres, and one to locks or back row

[Stom]

I would love the following team:

Mako
George
Cole
AWJ
Itoje
Henderson
Warburton
BillyV
Webb
Ford
North
Henshaw
Joseph
Trimble
Halfpenny

Best, McGrath, ?, JGray, Faletau, Murray/Davies, Jackson, Hogg

[Digby]

That's only about 7 more English players than I'd like. Though they're welcome to Hartley.

[cashead]

If 40 players then maybe add one to the centres, and one to locks or back row

Probably would also afford one more in the specialist positions.

[Adder]

Tommy Seymour starting the season on fire, 6 tries against Connacht and Leinster.

[Digby]

If 40 players then maybe add one to the centres, and one to locks or back row

Probably would also afford one more in the specialist positions.

Not also, else it'd be going above 40. I suppose they might opt for another specialist in lieu of an extra centre, but I was already assuming they'd take 3 hookers, 9s and 10s, and it'd be nice having more for training purposes in the event of a minor injury but they'd get almost no game time.

[Mellsblue]

Stephen Jones' squad. Not as left field as usual - no mention of Luther Burrell or Simon Shaw - but still a few laughs in there, notably Flyhalf.

FB:
1/2P
Kearney

Wing:
Seymour
Watson
North

Centre:
S Williams
Joseph
Roberts
Taylor

FH:
Farrell
Biggar
Jackson

SH:
Murray
Webb
Youngs

Prop:
McGrath
Marler
M Rolipola
Cole
Nel

Hooker:
Hartley
George
Cowan-Dickie

Lock:
Itoje
Kruis
AWJ
Charteris
Henderson

Flanker:
Hardie
Haskell (obviously)
Moriarty
Warburton

No8:
B Rolipola
Faletau

[Big D]

This is as brutal a tour as the Lions will have faced in a while. 40 is not a massive bump from 37 that they took last time. Especially considering the rate at which players dropped and using Hogg at 10 etc.

My Squad would be (with a slight Scottish bias):
Forwards:
McGrath, Vunipola, Dickinson
Hartley, George, Best
Nel, Coles, Lee
Gray Jnr, Kruis, Itoje, Henderson, AWJ
Hardie, Faletau, Vunipola, Warburton, O'Brien

Backs:
Webb, Murray, Davies (Gatland might fancy Laidlaw)
Ford, Biggar
Farrell
Roberts, Tuilaigi, Joseph, Henshaw, Taylor
North, Seymour, Liam Williams, Watson, AN Other
Hogg, 1/2p

That would be a squad of 38. If squad of 40 I would add a back row and maybe Dunbar if he can stay fit.

Obviously 7 Scots wont happen but think Nel, Gray Jnr, Seymour and Hogg all have pretty decent shouts.

[bruce]

I'd not have 1/2p anywhere near the squad until he at least played some international games again.

[cashead]

So where should Gatland draw the line on reputation v. form?

[Eugene Wrayburn]

So where should Gatland draw the line on reputation v. form?

Form over the course of this year, with a massive bias towards international form and performances against NZ and Argentina (who play a similar game but worse). There are enough talented people in these islands not to piss around with reputation.

[Eugene Wrayburn]

Having said that this should be on form this year hears who I'd be looking at in the front row.

Hookers. We need mobility and breakdown work. Just set piece solidity won't cut it. I don't think we've got anyone who's perfect.
I think we discard Ross Ford. Christ knows how he's still an International and I'd be looking at McInally ahead of him for the Lions. He's quick and as a former back row adept at the breakdown. Similarly I'd be looking at Tom Youngs despite being in the Test wilderness. Rory Best would be my leading contender and a contender for tour captain. No doubt some wag will say that he's a liability in the line out despite Ireland having the best line out in the RWC. He's extraordinary at the breakdown - probably the best hooker there I've ever seen - and we're really really going to need to challenge their ball everywhere. Owens and Hartley are solid but no more.

ETA I'd also like a serious look at Sean Cronin who is one of maybe 2 or 3 hookers with the pace and lines to match Dane Coles.

LHP
I've seen very little of the English lads aside from the Test players. Mako would pretty definitely go. If Marler's rediscovered how to scrummage and ever learns to contribute outside the setpiece then I might consider him, but not likely. Closer to home sadly Cian Healy is done, a shadow of the player he once was. McGrath would pretty definitely go. I have a real soft spot for Al Dickinson, so I'd like to see him considered even if he's basically a real prop (only smaller). It's too late for Geth and none of the other welsh props looks up to it.

THP
Cole and Nel are pretty nailed on. Ross lacks the mobility we'd need and is getting on. I've no idea how Marty Moore is doing now hes in England but his Test opportunities are likely to be limited. fo Ireland before his injury he was as solid as Ross in the scrum and did a lot more besides. None of the welsh props is really in with a shout.

[cashead]

How's Tom Youngs' throwing these days?

[Eugene Wrayburn]

How's Tom Youngs' throwing these days?

I don't watch much English rugby so I don't know about right now but it has always been ok at club level. i think the line out used to be generally dysfunctional. I'd expect him to be better in the new regime.

[Stom]

Jamie George is probably the best hooker in the loose available.

Luke Cowan-Dickie is also excellent in the loose, but his ruck play and set piece isn't good enough for international rugby, nevermind the Lions.

I think there are very few "have to go"s, but one of those has to be Itoje. The guy is a phenomenon.

[Digby]

Rory Best would be my leading contender and a contender for tour captain. No doubt some wag will say that he's a liability in the line out despite Ireland having the best line out in the RWC. He's extraordinary at the breakdown - probably the best hooker there I've ever seen - and we're really really going to need to challenge their ball everywhere

Potentially challenge their ball everywhere perhaps. Leaving aside needing to get the physicality, mobility, set piece and discipline right do we need to challenge their ball everywhere or know what we're doing on our ball more?

NZ it seems tend to get involved with more rucks than any other pack, but most of that is on their ball smashing in low over the ball to deliver the chance for Smith to play quickly. But whilst their conditioning may be superior they drop off Vs many leading teams for their work in defence at the ruck, yes if they do spot a chance to gain a turnover/penalty commit quickly

It's not just workrate or ruck technique which might be the key to beating NZ, but when the team works, and when the team conserves. And thus the Lions who surely will not be as drilled as NZ (or any leading test side) need to know whether they simply want to compete at every breakdown, especially on our ball given any lack of support will likely be brutally exposed, or whether to try and match up to the NZ system of raised work on attack and lower work on defence.

Also worth noting the NZ higher workrate tends to come from the locks and the tighthead. And even within that Retallick often outperforms Whitelock in ruck stats, but come the big games Sam goes up a gear or two

[Eugene Wrayburn]

Rory Best would be my leading contender and a contender for tour captain. No doubt some wag will say that he's a liability in the line out despite Ireland having the best line out in the RWC. He's extraordinary at the breakdown - probably the best hooker there I've ever seen - and we're really really going to need to challenge their ball everywhere

Potentially challenge their ball everywhere perhaps. Leaving aside needing to get the physicality, mobility, set piece and discipline right do we need to challenge their ball everywhere or know what we're doing on our ball more?

NZ it seems tend to get involved with more rucks than any other pack, but most of that is on their ball smashing in low over the ball to deliver the chance for Smith to play quickly. But whilst their conditioning may be superior they drop off Vs many leading teams for their work in defence at the ruck, yes if they do spot a chance to gain a turnover/penalty commit quickly

It's not just workrate or ruck technique which might be the key to beating NZ, but when the team works, and when the team conserves. And thus the Lions who surely will not be as drilled as NZ (or any leading test side) need to know whether they simply want to compete at every breakdown, especially on our ball given any lack of support will likely be brutally exposed, or whether to try and match up to the NZ system of raised work on attack and lower work on defence.

Also worth noting the NZ higher workrate tends to come from the locks and the tighthead. And even within that Retallick often outperforms Whitelock in ruck stats, but come the big games Sam goes up a gear or two

We definitely can't just let them have the ball because they will definitely outscore us if we do, being inevitably better drilled a nde generally less wasteful than any other Test side. The only solution I can see is to try to challenge their supply of ball on every occasion that it's not absolutely hopeless. that's really the only time I've ever seen them rattled is when some team has been piling into rucks and mauls to challenge their ball.

[Digby]

Rory Best would be my leading contender and a contender for tour captain. No doubt some wag will say that he's a liability in the line out despite Ireland having the best line out in the RWC. He's extraordinary at the breakdown - probably the best hooker there I've ever seen - and we're really really going to need to challenge their ball everywhere

Potentially challenge their ball everywhere perhaps. Leaving aside needing to get the physicality, mobility, set piece and discipline right do we need to challenge their ball everywhere or know what we're doing on our ball more?

NZ it seems tend to get involved with more rucks than any other pack, but most of that is on their ball smashing in low over the ball to deliver the chance for Smith to play quickly. But whilst their conditioning may be superior they drop off Vs many leading teams for their work in defence at the ruck, yes if they do spot a chance to gain a turnover/penalty commit quickly

It's not just workrate or ruck technique which might be the key to beating NZ, but when the team works, and when the team conserves. And thus the Lions who surely will not be as drilled as NZ (or any leading test side) need to know whether they simply want to compete at every breakdown, especially on our ball given any lack of support will likely be brutally exposed, or whether to try and match up to the NZ system of raised work on attack and lower work on defence.

Also worth noting the NZ higher workrate tends to come from the locks and the tighthead. And even within that Retallick often outperforms Whitelock in ruck stats, but come the big games Sam goes up a gear or two

We definitely can't just let them have the ball because they will definitely outscore us if we do, being inevitably better drilled a nde generally less wasteful than any other Test side. The only solution I can see is to try to challenge their supply of ball on every occasion that it's not absolutely hopeless. that's really the only time I've ever seen them rattled is when some team has been piling into rucks and mauls to challenge their ball.

That's fine. Is that task of just piling in one which suits Best, or is he more suited to standing off and making a judgement call? If we're going to pile in on defence it does suggest we can't really do that on attack too or the wheels will fall off at 50-60 minutes, which means kicking early if nothing is happening, and means picking good kickers from hand at 9 and 10.

We could try it certainly, my first thought is that piling in looking to disrupt hasn't gotten any easier now you can't accidentally kick a player and get away with saying the ball was nearby. My second thought is they rarely get done at the lineout, indeed NZ often nick a fair amount of ball at the lineout, and it might be an easier way to get at them than the ruck, and Best isn't best suited to being secure at the lineout.

I would say I like Best as a player and have no issue with him starting for the Lions.

[Eugene Wrayburn]

Potentially challenge their ball everywhere perhaps. Leaving aside needing to get the physicality, mobility, set piece and discipline right do we need to challenge their ball everywhere or know what we're doing on our ball more?

NZ it seems tend to get involved with more rucks than any other pack, but most of that is on their ball smashing in low over the ball to deliver the chance for Smith to play quickly. But whilst their conditioning may be superior they drop off Vs many leading teams for their work in defence at the ruck, yes if they do spot a chance to gain a turnover/penalty commit quickly

It's not just workrate or ruck technique which might be the key to beating NZ, but when the team works, and when the team conserves. And thus the Lions who surely will not be as drilled as NZ (or any leading test side) need to know whether they simply want to compete at every breakdown, especially on our ball given any lack of support will likely be brutally exposed, or whether to try and match up to the NZ system of raised work on attack and lower work on defence.

Also worth noting the NZ higher workrate tends to come from the locks and the tighthead. And even within that Retallick often outperforms Whitelock in ruck stats, but come the big games Sam goes up a gear or two

We definitely can't just let them have the ball because they will definitely outscore us if we do, being inevitably better drilled a nde generally less wasteful than any other Test side. The only solution I can see is to try to challenge their supply of ball on every occasion that it's not absolutely hopeless. that's really the only time I've ever seen them rattled is when some team has been piling into rucks and mauls to challenge their ball.

That's fine. Is that task of just piling in one which suits Best, or is he more suited to standing off and making a judgement call? If we're going to pile in on defence it does suggest we can't really do that on attack too or the wheels will fall off at 50-60 minutes, which means kicking early if nothing is happening, and means picking good kickers from hand at 9 and 10.

We could try it certainly, my first thought is that piling in looking to disrupt hasn't gotten any easier now you can't accidentally kick a player and get away with saying the ball was nearby. My second thought is they rarely get done at the lineout, indeed NZ often nick a fair amount of ball at the lineout, and it might be an easier way to get at them than the ruck, and Best isn't best suited to being secure at the lineout.

I would say I like Best as a player and have no issue with him starting for the Lions.

The vast majority of the time Best is exemplary at the line out. I think the last wobble I can remember was the Lions 4 years ago. Rory's very astute as to when to go for the ball and when to defend the ruck.

We had better be picking good kickers at 9 and 10 and 15 full stop. Trying to run every ball back at NZ will be impossible and we're going to need extremely accurate kicking from hand to relieve and exert territorial pressure.

[Digby]

Rory's very astute as to when to go for the ball and when to defend the ruck.

Which isn't quite the same as trying to put pressure on their ball everywhere by smashing and disrupting whatever can be reached

[Sandydragon]

Stephen Jones' squad. Not as left field as usual - no mention of Luther Burrell or Simon Shaw - but still a few laughs in there, notably Flyhalf.

FB:
1/2P
Kearney

Wing:
Seymour
Watson
North

Centre:
S Williams
Joseph
Roberts
Taylor

FH:
Farrell
Biggar
Jackson

SH:
Murray
Webb
Youngs

Prop:
McGrath
Marler
M Rolipola
Cole
Nel

Hooker:
Hartley
George
Cowan-Dickie

Lock:
Itoje
Kruis
AWJ
Charteris
Henderson

Flanker:
Hardie
Haskell (obviously)
Moriarty
Warburton

No8:
B Rolipola
Faletau

Haskell? Id suggest that there are a number of candidates above him. Actually, there are plenty of candidates above him. I'm also surprised that Liam Willians is no where in that squad.