Lions squad could accommodate as few as 35 players, Ireland boss Farrell in frame for assistant's role
Warren Gatland has revealed his Lions squad might only accommodate 35 players for next year’s tour to South Africa, down from 41 original picks for New Zealand in 2017 and 37 for Australia in 2013, while he also hopes to have the identity of his assistant coaches – a posse potentially headed by Andy Farrell – clarified by the end of November.
The lack of travel across multiple times zones to get to South Africa, allied with the Lions not having a midweek match leading into the first Test next July, were the reasons why Gatland said his squad number would be reduced, adding that the forwards/backs split could potentially be 20/15.
Gatland’s original 41-strong squad in 2017, which consisted of 16 players from England, twelve from Wales, eleven from Ireland and two from Scotland, was made up of 22 forwards and 19 backs.
In 2013, when Gatland first took charge of the tour after being an assistant in 2009, the 37-strong squad had a 21/16 forwards/backs split and consisted of 15 players from Wales, ten from England, nine from Ireland and three from Scotland.
“The squad size, we’re probably looking at 35, 36 players and maybe a 20/15 split or 20/16. In doing that we will probably name a standby squad,” said Gatland, who created controversy in 2017 by temporarily bringing six additional players into the squad the week of the first Test against the All Blacks to help with the midweek game against the Chiefs.
Talking about sowing confusion ???? https://t.co/q0adXyeSHg
— RugbyPass (@RugbyPass) October 28, 2020
“We don’t have a game before the first Test… so that makes it a heck of a lot easier for your preparation going into that first Test week. It does put a bit more pressure on you in those five lead-up games before the first Test in terms of your numbers, but you pick a squad of 35, 36, those players can engage fully right to the end of the tour.
“If you’re not in the 23 you’re only a performance or an injury away from getting selected or being in the squad. We have looked at that and being able to reduce the size of the squad is a lot easier compared to Australia or New Zealand. Bringing players over (due to injury), they can acclimatise a hell of a lot quicker. That is where our thinking is at the moment, but nothing is set in stone.”
Gatland was assisted on the 2017 Lions by Graham Rowntree, Steve Borthwick, Farrell, Rob Howley, and Neil Jenkins, and he had the same staff in 2013 except for Borthwick. Looking ahead to 2021, he said he wants some level of continuity but is also open to having some fresh voices onboard.
“When picking your coaching team the thing I found most important from a Lions perspective was because you have that limited preparation time, because you’re bringing a new group of players together and you’re trying to do things as quickly as you possibly can, having that continuity with people that have been there before, whether that is from a coaching perspective, strength and conditioning, medical, analysis, that makes a huge difference – but you want some new faces as well. That is important and we have done that on previous tours.
“I have got a huge amount of regard for Andy and his leadership, what he brings to the game, what he brings to a team. He understands winning, understands winning environments and he’s very smart. He’s definitely one of those guys you’re looking at from a continuity point of view perspective,” continued Gatland about the chances of the Lions having Farrell at their disposal again.
“I have spoken to all the four CEOs and directors of rugby as well in terms of the potential availability of coaches and hopefully in the next three, four weeks we will be able to put a list of those people together, agree on terms with them and be able to get that out there.
“He [Farrell] is definitely one of the ones who has been on two tours, been incredibly successful, great role for him now as the head coach and Ireland have to make a decision about if they were prepared to release him (for the Lions).
“I see massive benefits in someone going on a Lions tour on what they learn from the other players, the team that they are playing against. It’s a great experience, it’s incredibly tough, but that is up to the individual unions about whether they are prepared to release him. We have had those conversations already and we’re just waiting to finalise over the next few weeks the availability of some people.”
Farrell recently claimed he had no contact with the Lions regarding 2021, but he didn’t rule out being open to an approach even though it would clash with an Ireland tour elsewhere. Gatland, meanwhile, mentioned without any great conviction that he had been in touch with Leinster’s Stuart Lancaster and Exeter double winner Rob Baxter, but he was far more enthusiastic about Scotland boss Gregor Townsend, who turned him down in 2017.
“He initially said yes and then he became unavailable. I like what Gregor does… I like the way Gregor coaches and the job he did with Glasgow and with Scotland. He is definitely not out of contention to be part of the Lions tour.
“I spoke to Stuart a long time ago,” added Gatland. “I’d an email from Rob (Baxter) but that was more to do with talking to Rob Hunter about what I was looking for from a forwards perspective in terms of the Exeter players for the future. I haven’t had any personal conversations with him about the Lions.”
– Warren Gatland was speaking on behalf of Canterbury at the launch of the British and Irish Lions Pro jersey, available at Canterbury.com
It's shaping up be a Golden Oldies tour in South Africa ? https://t.co/VNfiN8Vf8b
— RugbyPass (@RugbyPass) October 28, 2020
Comments on RugbyPass
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
6 Go to commentsNo way. If you are trying to picture New Zealand rugby with an All Blacks mindset, there have been two factors instrumental to the decline of NZ rugby to date. Those are the horror that the Blues have become and, probably more so, the fixture that the Crusaders became. I don’t think it was healthy to have one team so dominant for so long, both for lack of proper representation of players from outside that environment and on the over reliance on players from within it. If you are another international side, like Ireland for example, sure. You can copy paste something succinct from one level to the next and experience a huge increase in standards, but ultimately you will not be maximizing it, which is what you need to perform to the level the ABs do. Added to that is the apathy that develops in the whole game as a result of one sides dominance. NZ, Super, and Championship rugby should all experience a boom as a result of things balancing out. That said, there is a lot of bad news happening in NZ rugby recently, and I’m not sure the game can be handled well enough here to postpone the always-there feeling of inevitable decline of rugby.
6 Go to commentsNo SA supporter miss Super Rugby - a product that is experiencing significant head wind in ANZ - the competition from rival codes are intense, match attendance figures are at a historical low and the negativity of commentators such as Kirwan and Wilson have accelerated the downward spiral in NZ. After the next RWC in 2027 sponsors will follow Qantas and start leaving in droves.
2 Go to commentsLike others, I am not seeing the connection between this edition of the Crusaders and the All Blacks future prospects under Razor. I think the analysis of the Crusaders attack recently is helpful because Razor and his coaching team used to be able to slot new guys in to their systems and see them succeed. Several of Razor’s coaches are still there so it would be surprising if the current attack and set piece has been overhauled to a great extent - but based on that analysis, it may have been. Whether it is too many new guys due to injuries or retirement or a failure of current Crusaders systems is the main question to be answered imo. It doesn’t seem relevant for the ABs.
6 Go to commentsharry potter is set in stone. he creates stability and finishes well. exactly what schmidt likes. he’s the ben smith of australian rugby. i think it could quite easily be potter toole and kellaway for the foreseeable future.
5 Go to commentsThis is short sighted from Clayton if you ask me, smacks of too much preseason planning and no adaptability. What if DMac is out for a must win match, are they still only going to bring their best first five and playmaker on late in the game? Trusting the game to someone who wasn’t even part of planning (they would have had Trask pinned in as Jacomb preseason). Perhaps if the Crusaders were better they would not have done this, but either way imo you take this opportunity to play a guy you might need starting in a final rather than having their 12th game getting comfortable coming off the bench.
1 Go to commentsThanks Brett.. At last a positive article on the potential of Wallaby candidates, great to read. Schmidt’s record as an international rugby coach speaks for itself, I’m somewhat confident he will turn the Wallaby’s fortunes around …. on the field. It will be up to others to steady the ship off the paddock. But is there a flaw in my optimism? We have known all along that Australia has the players to be very competitive with their international rivals. We know that because everyone keeps telling us. So why the poor results? A question that requires a definitive answer before the turn around can occur. Joe Schmidt signed on for 2 years, time to encompass the Lions tour of 2025. By all accounts he puts family first and that’s fair enough, but I would wager that his 2 year contract will be extended if the next 18 months or so shows the statement “Australia has the players” proves to be correct. The new coach does not have a lot of time to meld together an outfit that will be competitive in the Rugby Championship - it will be interesting to see what happens. It will be interesting to see what happens with Giteau law, the new Wallaby coach has already verbalised that he would to prefer to select from those who play their rugby in Australia. His first test in charge is in July just over 3 months away .. not a long time. I for one wish him well .. heaven knows Australia needs some positive vibes.
21 Go to commentsWhat a load of bollocks. The author has forgotten to mention the fact that the Crusaders have a huge injury toll with top world class players out. Not to mention the fact that they are obviously in a transition period. No this will not spark a slow death for NZ rugby, but it does mean there will be a new Super Rugby champion. Anyone who knows anything about NZ rugby knows that there is some serious talent here, it just isn’t all at the Crusaders.
6 Go to commentsI wouldn’t spend the time on Nawaqanitawase! No point in having him filling in a jersey when he’s committed to leave Union. Give the jersey to a young prospect who will be here in the future.
5 Go to commentsIt was a pleasure to watch those guys playing with such confidence. That trio can all be infuriating for different reasons and I can see why Jones might have decided against them. No way to justify leaving Ikitau out though. Jorgensen and him were both scheduled to return at the same time. Only one of them plays for Randwick and has a dad who is great mates with the national coach though.
53 Go to commentsBrayden Iose and Peter Lakai are very exciting Super Rugby players but are too short and too light to ever be a Test 8 vs South Africa, France, Ireland, and England, Lakai could potentially be a Test player at 7 if he is allowed to focus on 7 for Hurricanes.
7 Go to commentsPencils “Thomas du Toit” into possible 2027 Bok squad.
1 Go to commentsDon’t see why Harrison makes the bench. Jones can play at 10 if needed, and there is a good case for starting her there to begin with if testing combinations. That would leave room for Sing on the bench
1 Go to commentsWhat a load of old bull!
1 Go to commentsOf the rugby I’ve born witness to in my lifetime - 1990 to date - I recognize great players throughout those years. But I have no doubt the game and the players are on average better today. So I doubt going back further is going to prove me wrong. The technical components of the game, set pieces, scrums, kicks, kicks at goal. And in general tactics employed are far more efficient, accurate and polished. Professional athletes that have invested countless hours on being accurate. There is one nation though that may be fairly competitive in any era - and that for me is the all blacks. And New Zealand players in general. NZ produces startling athletes who have fantastic ball skills. And then the odd phenomenon like Brooke. Lomu. Mcaw. Carter. Better than comparing players and teams across eras - I’ve often had this thought - that it would be very interesting to have a version of the game that is closer to its original form. What would the game look like today if the rules were rolled back. Not rules that promote safety obviously - but rules like: - a try being worth 1 point and conversion 2 points. Hence the term “try”. Earning a try at goals. Would we see more attacking play? - no lifting in the lineouts. - rucks and break down laws in general. They looked like wrestling matches in bygone eras. I wonder what a game applying 1995 rules would look like with modern players. It may be a daft exercise, but it would make for an interesting spectacle celebrating “purer” forms of the game that roll back the rules dramatically by a few versions. Would we come to learn that some of the rules/combinations of the rules we see today have actually made the game less attractive? I’d love to see an exhibition match like that.
29 Go to commentsIrish Rugby CEO be texting Andy Farrell “Andy, i found our next Kiwi Irishman”
5 Go to commentsI certainly don’t miss drinking beers at 8am in the morning watching rugby games being played in NZ.
2 Go to commentsThis looks like a damage limitation exercise for Wales, keeping back some of their more effective players for the last 20/25 minutes to try and counter England’s fresh legs so the Red Roses don’t rack up a big score.
2 Go to commentsVery unlikely the Bulls will beat Leinster in Dublin. It would be different in Pretoria.
1 Go to commentsI think it is a dangerous path to go down to ban a player for the same period that a player they injured takes to recover. Players would be afraid to tackle anyone. I once tackled my best friend at school in a practice match and sprained his ankle. I paid for it by having to play fly-half instead of full-back for the rest of that season’s fixtures.
5 Go to comments