Page 5 of 52
Re: Lions
Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 5:47 pm
by Edinburgh in Exile
hugh_woatmeigh wrote:
If there was ever an appointment to make me support the opposition... Hopefully there are no Scots and the lions get pumped.
Ha, for fuck sake... You realise that you typed that right? And that you are an adult, and not a 4 year old right?
Re: Lions
Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 11:49 pm
by Lizard
Gatland is the obvious choice. After all, he already knows 10 ways not to beat the All Blacks, whereas Vern and Joe only know one each. (Joe will get a couple more shots at it in November - if he isn't picked for the Lions role but wins either of those there might be some egg on face).
Re: Lions
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 8:08 am
by Big D
Well against the apparent normal Scottish view I'm quite looking forward to it. Then again I liked the 5 and now 6N but folk want that changed too.
Some good battles ahead. Of course NZ are massive favourites, they are in every game.
Re: Lions
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 8:40 am
by Stones of granite
Chunks Baws wrote:hugh_woatmeigh wrote:
If there was ever an appointment to make me support the opposition... Hopefully there are no Scots and the lions get pumped.
I personally wouldn't go that far, but I don't think you'll be alone.
He won't be alone. Me and Hugh Woathmeigh BFFs
Re: Lions
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 9:23 am
by Mikey Brown
It just seems weird when you know so many of our players would love to get the chance to play for the lions, I would too. I don't want to have a team full of people who aren't good enough to get in a side that get spanked anyway.
I want to see what guys like Jonny Gray do.
Re: Lions
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 3:07 pm
by Croft_No.5
This MB. It is the same on the EMB Lions Board, the consideration of what the players might want is forgotten. I wouldn't think that the Lions Jersey is at all devalued in their eyes and for me they are the ones that really count. I will go on enjoying the rugby and the key contributions made by the "token" Scots!
Re: Lions
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 4:35 pm
by OptimisticJock
Scots. Chucking the toys oot the pram since 843.
Re: RE: Re: Lions
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 7:35 pm
by Donny osmond
OptimisticJock wrote:Scots. Chucking the toys oot the pram since 843.
What happened in 843?
Re: Lions
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 7:47 pm
by Which Tyler
Lizard wrote:Gatland is the obvious choice. After all, he already knows 10 ways not to beat the All Blacks, whereas Vern and Joe only know one each. (Joe will get a couple more shots at it in November - if he isn't picked for the Lions role but wins either of those there might be some egg on face).
Are you sure about that? I've seen no evidence in the last decade that Gatland knows 10 different ways to do anything, let alone 10 different ways to play rugby, or to lose to the AB.s
Are you sure you're not thinking of 1 way, tried 10 times with no change in outcome? (Anyone got Einstein's number?)
Re: RE: Re: Lions
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 8:00 pm
by Edinburgh in Exile
Donny osmond wrote:OptimisticJock wrote:Scots. Chucking the toys oot the pram since 843.
What happened in 843?
Scots started chucking toys oot the pram Donny. I would have thought that was clear.
Also, seeing as you asked. The Vikings sacked Nates. not sure why... Nates doesn't sound very Scandinavian... Probably brought in a load of non Viking qualified lads and kick 90% of possession away.
Re: Lions
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 8:16 pm
by Lizard
Which Tyler wrote:Lizard wrote:Gatland is the obvious choice. After all, he already knows 10 ways not to beat the All Blacks, whereas Vern and Joe only know one each. (Joe will get a couple more shots at it in November - if he isn't picked for the Lions role but wins either of those there might be some egg on face).
Are you sure about that? I've seen no evidence in the last decade that Gatland knows 10 different ways to do anything, let alone 10 different ways to play rugby, or to lose to the AB.s
Are you sure you're not thinking of 1 way, tried 10 times with no change in outcome? (Anyone got Einstein's number?)
Alright, he knows one way that he can be confident won't beat the All Blacks to a very high P Value.
The other two still only have 1 data point on their method.
Re: RE: Re: Lions
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 9:56 pm
by OptimisticJock
Donny osmond wrote:OptimisticJock wrote:Scots. Chucking the toys oot the pram since 843.
What happened in 843?
It's (1 arguable date for) the foundation of the Kingdom of Scots. There were toys everywhere min.
Re: Lions
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 10:25 pm
by Lizard
OptimisticJock wrote:Donny osmond wrote:OptimisticJock wrote:Scots. Chucking the toys oot the pram since 843.
What happened in 843?
It's (1 arguable date for) the foundation of the Kingdom of Scots. There were toys everywhere min.
Of all the arguable dates, I think you've Pict the most accepted one...
Re: Lions
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 10:33 pm
by OptimisticJock
Lizard wrote:OptimisticJock wrote:Donny osmond wrote:
What happened in 843?
It's (1 arguable date for) the foundation of the Kingdom of Scots. There were toys everywhere min.
Of all the arguable dates, I think you've Pict the most accepted one...
Scot to be mate.
Re: RE: Re: Lions
Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 9:43 am
by Stones of granite
Edinburgh in Exile wrote:Donny osmond wrote:OptimisticJock wrote:Scots. Chucking the toys oot the pram since 843.
What happened in 843?
Scots started chucking toys oot the pram Donny. I would have thought that was clear.
Also, seeing as you asked. The Vikings sacked Nates. not sure why... Nates doesn't sound very Scandinavian... Probably brought in a load of non Viking qualified lads and kick 90% of possession away.
Na
ntes. The Vikings sacked Na
ntes in 843, not Nate. Although I dare say any guy called Nate who was in Nantes at the time may well have got sacked too, especially if he was on stag and nodded off.
Anyhoo. A missing "n" might seem a small detail, but I am actually sitting in Na
ntes as I type this drivel.
Re: Lions
Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 11:51 am
by Croft_No.5
nnnnnnnnNice
Re: Lions
Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 1:16 pm
by Stones of granite
Croft_No.5 wrote:nnnnnnnnNice
No that was the Saracens in 859. Though it could have been a Viking false-flag action.
Re: RE: Re: Lions
Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 2:16 pm
by Edinburgh in Exile
Stones of granite wrote:Edinburgh in Exile wrote:Donny osmond wrote:
What happened in 843?
Scots started chucking toys oot the pram Donny. I would have thought that was clear.
Also, seeing as you asked. The Vikings sacked Nates. not sure why... Nates doesn't sound very Scandinavian... Probably brought in a load of non Viking qualified lads and kick 90% of possession away.
Na
ntes. The Vikings sacked Na
ntes in 843, not Nate. Although I dare say any guy called Nate who was in Nantes at the time may well have got sacked too, especially if he was on stag and nodded off.
Anyhoo. A missing "n" might seem a small detail, but I am actually sitting in Na
ntes as I type this drivel.
Ha... Christ... My post there was a fucking shambles, not only did I utterly fail to see Baz was referencing our own history, I actualy googled that weak ass joke, and still spelt it wrong. I'm giving myself an uppercut.
Still Woot, I imagine you know the spelling from being there... The first time... In 843... You see... Because... you know... You are really old n' shit... Ah har... Har har.
I know.... I'll give myself another uppercut.
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Lions
Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 2:30 pm
by Donny osmond
Edinburgh in Exile wrote:Stones of granite wrote:Edinburgh in Exile wrote:
Scots started chucking toys oot the pram Donny. I would have thought that was clear.
Also, seeing as you asked. The Vikings sacked Nates. not sure why... Nates doesn't sound very Scandinavian... Probably brought in a load of non Viking qualified lads and kick 90% of possession away.
Na
ntes. The Vikings sacked Na
ntes in 843, not Nate. Although I dare say any guy called Nate who was in Nantes at the time may well have got sacked too, especially if he was on stag and nodded off.
Anyhoo. A missing "n" might seem a small detail, but I am actually sitting in Na
ntes as I type this drivel.
Ha... Christ... My post there was a fucking shambles, not only did I utterly fail to see Baz was referencing our own history, I actualy googled that weak ass joke, and still spelt it wrong. I'm giving myself an uppercut.
Still Woot, I imagine you know the spelling from being there... The first time... In 843... You see... Because... you know... You are really old n' shit... Ah har... Har har.
I know.... I'll give myself another uppercut.
Edinburgh festival has a few days left, no? You could be a player. Mind you, stand up comedy would be difficult to pull off if no one knows you're standing up.
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Lions
Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 2:57 pm
by OptimisticJock
Donny osmond wrote:Edinburgh in Exile wrote:Stones of granite wrote:
Nantes. The Vikings sacked Nantes in 843, not Nate. Although I dare say any guy called Nate who was in Nantes at the time may well have got sacked too, especially if he was on stag and nodded off.
Anyhoo. A missing "n" might seem a small detail, but I am actually sitting in Nantes as I type this drivel.
Ha... Christ... My post there was a fucking shambles, not only did I utterly fail to see Baz was referencing our own history, I actualy googled that weak ass joke, and still spelt it wrong. I'm giving myself an uppercut.
Still Woot, I imagine you know the spelling from being there... The first time... In 843... You see... Because... you know... You are really old n' shit... Ah har... Har har.
I know.... I'll give myself another uppercut.
Edinburgh festival has a few days left, no? You could be a player. Mind you, stand up comedy would be difficult to pull off if no one knows you're standing up.
Well considering what was voted the best joke at the festival I think EinE is on to a winner.
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Lions
Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 3:05 pm
by hp18
Donny osmond wrote:Edinburgh in Exile wrote:Stones of granite wrote:
Nantes. The Vikings sacked Nantes in 843, not Nate. Although I dare say any guy called Nate who was in Nantes at the time may well have got sacked too, especially if he was on stag and nodded off.
Anyhoo. A missing "n" might seem a small detail, but I am actually sitting in Nantes as I type this drivel.
Ha... Christ... My post there was a fucking shambles, not only did I utterly fail to see Baz was referencing our own history, I actualy googled that weak ass joke, and still spelt it wrong. I'm giving myself an uppercut.
Still Woot, I imagine you know the spelling from being there... The first time... In 843... You see... Because... you know... You are really old n' shit... Ah har... Har har.
I know.... I'll give myself another uppercut.
Edinburgh festival has a few days left, no? You could be a player. Mind you, stand up comedy would be difficult to pull off if no one knows you're standing up.
Headshot.
Re: RE: Re: Lions
Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 6:57 pm
by Stones of granite
Edinburgh in Exile wrote:Stones of granite wrote:Edinburgh in Exile wrote:
Scots started chucking toys oot the pram Donny. I would have thought that was clear.
Also, seeing as you asked. The Vikings sacked Nates. not sure why... Nates doesn't sound very Scandinavian... Probably brought in a load of non Viking qualified lads and kick 90% of possession away.
Na
ntes. The Vikings sacked Na
ntes in 843, not Nate. Although I dare say any guy called Nate who was in Nantes at the time may well have got sacked too, especially if he was on stag and nodded off.
Anyhoo. A missing "n" might seem a small detail, but I am actually sitting in Na
ntes as I type this drivel.
Ha... Christ... My post there was a fucking shambles, not only did I utterly fail to see Baz was referencing our own history, I actualy googled that weak ass joke, and still spelt it wrong. I'm giving myself an uppercut.
Still Woot, I imagine you know the spelling from being there... The first time... In 843... You see... Because... you know... You are really old n' shit... Ah har... Har har.
I know.... I'll give myself another uppercut.
Back in 843 it wasn't even called Nantes, the Breton name is Naoned. The local equivalent of Settler Watch like to spray paint it on the road signs.
Re: Lions
Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2016 4:43 pm
by whatisthejava
Telegraph just posted their 37 man Lions team
Hogg and Wp only 2 scots
I think the Gray brothers are a little unfortunate but without 3 wins and that all important win over Wales in the 6N that may be it.
Not sure why Wales have 10 players though, they look completely feckless right now , Ireland and England are so far ahead of us and Wales
Re: Lions
Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2016 5:17 pm
by Cameo
In a 37 man squad I dont thatd be fair. Grays and at least one centre for starters
Re: Lions
Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2016 5:18 pm
by switchskier
whatisthejava wrote:Telegraph just posted their 37 man Lions team
Hogg and Wp only 2 scots
I think the Gray brothers are a little unfortunate but without 3 wins and that all important win over Wales in the 6N that may be it.
Not sure why Wales have 10 players though, they look completely feckless right now , Ireland and England are so far ahead of us and Wales
14 tackles (most in the game) with none missed, 12 carries (second most in the game to Matera) and the motm award for Gray jr yesterday. At one point Mossy claimed that he has gone over 100 tackles without missing one for Glasgow. More than any scot he should be on the plane to NZ. Him and Ijote going up against Retallick and Whitelock would be an utterly fantastic battle. Going to be massively disappointed when Gatland inevitably selects AWJ and Charteris ahead of him.