Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

'Just dreadful' - The one overriding consensus around the Lions tour

By Ian Cameron
Owen Farrell /PA

If there is one note that former players, spectators and pundits seem to be finding some consensus on in the aftermath of the British & Irish Lions tour of South Africa, it’s that the rugby on display has been dire.

ADVERTISEMENT

In the grand tradition of Lions’ tours past there was intrigue, cattiness, vitriol, and off-field dramas aplenty – but what unfolded on the field was not so much spectacle as debacle.

The series was a ‘one for the purists’ – which, of course, is code in rugby union for absolute crap. It may be the only thing people are agreeing on.

Video Spacer

Warren Gatland speaks about what must change on B&I Lions tour and what is in his future

Video Spacer

Warren Gatland speaks about what must change on B&I Lions tour and what is in his future

While those defending the series might claim it was a compelling but ugly drama, the emphasis on kick to contest tactics left most fans bemoaning a Lions tour that ultimately failed to deliver on anything that might be described as an attractive brand of rugby.

Rugby’s talking heads have duly lined up to vent.

CLIVE WOODWARD
Former World Cup-winning coach Clive Woodward enjoyed the strategic battle but not the rugby on show: “Although the coach in me enjoyed the chess match element of this series there was very little rugby to savour — a poor highlights reel.”

BEN KAY
Writing in his RugbyPass column, former Lions lock Ben Kay said the mediocre rugby didn’t have the advantage of the normal buzz around a Lions’ tour. “The issue they’ve had with this tour is the rugby wasn’t up to much and we had no crowds to cover that up. The tour that saved the concept was the 1997 tour but why did we love it? It was because of the drama and the fans. If you’d put 55,000 in that Cape Town Stadium on three consecutive weekends with the cameras picking up the atmosphere, the nerves, the elation and the heartbreak, you would have been prepared to forget some of the rugby. This tour hasn’t enhanced the Lions brand, but it hasn’t diminished it. In the current circumstances, credit must go to them for getting it over the line.

JONATHAN DAVIES
Welsh legend Jonathan ‘Jiffy’ Davies called for rules changes in light of a series blighted by kicking and negative play. “As a spectacle, it was just dreadful. The general supporter who follows the Six Nations and the Lions, will they sit down and watch that kicking, kicking, kicking?

ADVERTISEMENT

“I don’t know if they will. And will kids want to take up the game if you are not going to see the ball on the wing or at outside centre?”

ALLAIN ROLLAND
Retired international referee Alain Rolland wasn’t shy about slamming what was on offer in his Daily Mail column: “This whole series — both on and off the field — has been a poor advertisement for the game of rugby. Something that promised so much, delivered so little. Across the three games, it was hard to watch at times.

“It was not enjoyable to watch. If you were put on this planet having never seen rugby before and watched this series, you would not be rushing out to play the game. Our game deserves more.”

FRASER BROWN
Writing in The Scotsman, Scotland hooker Fraser Brown wrote: “What we’ve witnessed over the last three weekends, in my opinion, was some way short of our best version of rugby. At times on Saturday the Lions showed what they were capable of and what could have been if they had chosen to play with pace and tempo from the first Test but, instead, they tried to out-Boks the Boks. It’s a tactic that has rarely, if ever worked.”

ADVERTISEMENT
Lions tour
Fraser Brown /Getty

MATT WILLIAMS
The former Scotland and Leinster head coach noted: “There will be little honour for whoever wins. The world has viewed this series as a regrettable and grubby event, in which both the Lions and the Springboks have done rugby a grave disservice.”

IAN FOSTER
The All Blacks head coach said the rugby had put him to sleep: “I watched it between 10pm and 1am last night, it put me to sleep,” Foster mused. “The Lions series, the one we had here, the one over there, it’s become very tight, almost risk-free type of series, aren’t they? Teams are almost afraid to play, they are just relying on a low-risk strategy.

Ian Foster Lions tour
Photo credit: © Andrew Cornaga / www.photosport.nz

“So we are seeing two teams who desperately want to win a big series playing low-risk, highly-effective rugby. Both of them are good at the close contact stuff, the close quarter fighting, the kick and chase, and the pressure game. Two teams playing a similar style, it’s a bit of a slugfest.”

PIETER DE VILLIERS
The outspoken former Bok boss said even he felt the South Africa’s style of play left him disinterested. “Firstly, it’s very boring. Does it give you results? Definitely, but it’s very, very boring. We suffocate people with our bulk and then we base our whole game-plan around defending, defending, defending. Instead of creating, creating, creating.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Join free

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | Episode 6

Sam Warburton | The Big Jim Show | Full Episode

Japan Rugby League One | Sungoliath v Eagles | Full Match Replay

Japan Rugby League One | Spears v Wild Knights | Full Match Replay

Boks Office | Episode 10 | Six Nations Final Round Review

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | How can New Zealand rugby beat this Ireland team

Beyond 80 | Episode 5

Rugby Europe Men's Championship Final | Georgia v Portugal | Full Match Replay

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
Jon 7 hours ago
Jake White: Are modern rugby players actually better?

This is the problem with conservative mindsets and phycology, and homogenous sports, everybody wants to be the same, use the i-win template. Athlete wise everyone has to have muscles and work at the gym to make themselves more likely to hold on that one tackle. Do those players even wonder if they are now more likely to be tackled by that player as a result of there “work”? Really though, too many questions, Jake. Is it better Jake? Yes, because you still have that rugby of ole that you talk about. Is it at the highest International level anymore? No, but you go to your club or checkout your representative side and still engage with that ‘beautiful game’. Could you also have a bit of that at the top if coaches encouraged there team to play and incentivized players like Damian McKenzie and Ange Capuozzo? Of course we could. Sadly Rugby doesn’t, or didn’t, really know what direction to go when professionalism came. Things like the state of northern pitches didn’t help. Over the last two or three decades I feel like I’ve been fortunate to have all that Jake wants. There was International quality Super Rugby to adore, then the next level below I could watch club mates, pulling 9 to 5s, take on the countries best in representative rugby. Rugby played with flair and not too much riding on the consequences. It was beautiful. That largely still exists today, but with the world of rugby not quite getting things right, the picture is now being painted in NZ that that level of rugby is not required in the “pathway” to Super Rugby or All Black rugby. You might wonder if NZR is right and the pathway shouldn’t include the ‘amateur’, but let me tell you, even though the NPC might be made up of people still having to pull 9-5s, we know these people still have dreams to get out of that, and aren’t likely to give them. They will be lost. That will put a real strain on the concept of whether “visceral thrill, derring-do and joyful abandon” type rugby will remain under the professional level here in NZ. I think at some point that can be eroded as well. If only wanting the best athlete’s at the top level wasn’t enough to lose that, shutting off the next group, or level, or rugby players from easy access to express and showcase themselves certainly will. That all comes back around to the same question of professionalism in rugby and whether it got things right, and rugby is better now. Maybe the answer is turning into a “no”?

35 Go to comments
j
john 10 hours ago
Will the Crusaders' decline spark a slow death for New Zealand rugby?

But here in Australia we were told Penney was another gun kiwi coach, for the Tahs…….and yet again it turned out the kiwi coach was completely useless. Another con job on Australian rugby. As was Robbie Deans, as was Dave Rennie. Both coaches dumped from NZ and promoted to Australia as our saviour. And the Tahs lap them up knowing they are second rate and knowing that under pressure when their short comings are exposed in Australia as well, that they will fall in below the largest most powerful province and choose second rate Tah players to save their jobs. As they do and exactly as Joe Schmidt will do. Gauranteed. Schmidt was dumped by NZ too. That’s why he went overseas. That why kiwi coaches take jobs in Australia, to try and prove they are not as bad as NZ thought they were. Then when they get found out they try and ingratiate themselves to NZ again by dragging Australian teams down with ridiculous selections and game plans. NZ rugby’s biggest problem is that it can’t yet transition from MCaw Cheatism. They just don’t know how to try and win on your merits. It is still always a contest to see how much cheating you can get away with. Without a cheating genius like McCaw, they are struggling. This I think is why my wise old mate in NZ thinks Robertson will struggle. The Crusaders are the nursery of McCaw Cheatism. Sean Fitzpatrick was probably the father of it. Robertson doesn’t know anything else but other countries have worked it out.

39 Go to comments
A
Adrian 12 hours ago
Will the Crusaders' decline spark a slow death for New Zealand rugby?

Thanks Nick The loss of players to OS, injury and retirement is certainly not helping the Crusaders. Ditto the coach. IMO Penny is there to hold the fort and cop the flak until new players and a new coach come through,…and that's understood and accepted by Penny and the Crusaders hierarchy. I think though that what is happening with the Crusaders is an indicator of what is happening with the other NZ SRP teams…..and the other SRP teams for that matter. Not enough money. The money has come via the SR competition and it’s not there anymore. It's in France, Japan and England. Unless or until something is done to make SR more SELLABLE to the NZ/Australia Rugby market AND the world rugby market the $s to keep both the very best players and the next rung down won't be there. They will play away from NZ more and more. I think though that NZ will continue to produce the players and the coaches of sufficient strength for NZ to have the capacity to stay at the top. Whether they do stay at the top as an international team will depend upon whether the money flowing to SRP is somehow restored, or NZ teams play in the Japan comp, or NZ opts to pick from anywhere. As a follower of many sports I’d have to say that the organisation and promotion of Super Rugby has been for the last 20 years closest to the worst I’ve ever seen. This hasn't necessarily been caused by NZ, but it’s happened. Perhaps it can be fixed, perhaps not. The Crusaders are I think a symptom of this, not the cause

39 Go to comments
FEATURE
FEATURE Juan Ignacio Brex: 'Italy made history, but it's not enough' Juan Ignacio Brex: 'Italy made history, but it's not enough'
Search