Schmidt rules himself out of Lions coaching role

Just saw this today, and I am over the moon. Another country can deal with disruption, JS can concentrate developing Ireland for 2019.

I would rather no Irish players toured as well, and Ireland go to Australia or Argentina for a test series and test ourselves against the best in their back yard.

http://www.the42.ie/schmidt-rules-out-lions-job-2570136-Jan2016/

Hope it's true and that the IRFU realise what an absolute gem of a coach we have before someone else tempts him away. No Lions tour is good news for Irish Rugby coaches, but some of the players could use the vote of confidence.

Mind you, Bestie got controversially left out of the Lions, got called-up late and had a poor tour, then stuck two fingers up to Gatland by playing the best rugby of his career as soon as he got home. Now he's Captain. So maybe no Lions isn't such a bad thing for our Best and brightest either.

Would be perfectly happy to see our lads stay at home and as the goon says go on tour to Australia or Argentina to develop for the RWC. Would do a lot more for our RWC chances than tooling around NZ with a makey-uppy team that has passed its sell-by date. (Cue the usual outrage from the usual 606 suspects - the ultimate accolade blahdeblah).

Brennomac
Think you're allowed your POV, as are Lions fans.

It is ridiculous that the NH sides are condemned for not being able to compete with the SH teams and then along comes the Lions to set them back even further.

The IRFU should draw up a list of players unavailable for Lions selection due to Ireland commitments.

The Great Aukster wrote:It is ridiculous that the NH sides are condemned for not being able to compete with the SH teams and then along comes the Lions to set them back even further.

The IRFU should draw up a list of players unavailable for Lions selection due to Ireland commitments.

As long as they have a reduced share of the spoils.

Smart man Joe. Rule himself out, because the gig is Gatland's and it's pointless him taking a lesser role. Leave that to Gatland's usual clique (though hopefully Cement Head takes that impostor Mcbryde along as forwards' coach, so he can't wreck another Wales tour if we have one).

RiscaGame wrote:Smart man Joe. Rule himself out, because the gig is Gatland's and it's pointless him taking a lesser role. Leave that to Gatland's usual clique (though hopefully Cement Head takes that impostor Mcbryde along as forwards' coach, so he can't wreck another Wales tour if we have one).

All the while he's asking Andy Farrell to tell him exactly what Gatland thought the Irish players biggest strengths and weaknesses were when they were picking the squad. I'd also say Rory Best won't struggle for motivation when he's writing his first team-talk as Ireland Captain

It's going to be a spicy few weeks on the internet isn't it?

HammerofThunor wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:It is ridiculous that the NH sides are condemned for not being able to compete with the SH teams and then along comes the Lions to set them back even further.

The IRFU should draw up a list of players unavailable for Lions selection due to Ireland commitments.

As long as they have a reduced share of the spoils.

Absolutely - that's the whole point. Hiring out the best players for money is not so much rugby Union as vice squad. Not sending the players will undoubtedly reduce the share of them being spoilt (that's good).

I was hoping Gatland would rule himself out too, so we aren't again left with McBryde and Howley running the show. Awful coaches. That and the fact Wales will be receiving the blame when the Lions lose the tour (a loss is highly likely, not only because it's NZ but also because of the structure).

There is too much rugby for top players. This is one thing that could easily be lost with no great loss.

I think it is a shame. I have always been a lions fan and Schmidt is a superb coach.

I understand the reluctance of Ireland fans to lose players or a coach but I do think the lions still means a huge amount to players and fans.

The challenge to emulate the wonderful win in '71 would be huge.

Exiledinborders wrote:There is too much rugby for top players. This is one thing that could easily be lost with no great loss.

go on one you'll change your tune

It's interesting to see more people concluding the Lions tour disrupts the World Cup planning of the home nations. Especially since the last tour saw a win, so it's not a reaction to repeated failure.

You can hold that opinion while still liking the history and uniqueness of Lions tours. As it stands, though, the calendar doesn't accommodate them properly. Unless adequate time is found, I'd rather not have them.

Personally i dont want Gatland on tour in 2017. Its almost certainly means we won't compete in the 6 Nations like in 2014 when we dropped from Champs to 3rd having put up most of the team to win in Aus.

Let someone else take the job on.

Don't worry every one, Lancaster will be there to lead the Lions on their nicest, cosiest and most PR friendly Tour yet.

It'll be really, really average to good

yappysnap wrote:Don't worry every one, Lancaster will be there to lead the Lions on their nicest, cosiest and most PR friendly Tour yet.

It'll be really, really average to good

I've always kind of been hoping Lancaster would get the job. He's a nice bloke and I'd rather be nice than successful when it comes to the Lions

In all seriousness, they should NOT pick a currently serving international coach to lead the tour. There are plenty of really good British and Irish coaches working at club level or not working at all;

Stuart Lancaster, Ian McGeechan, Declan Kidney, Eddie O'Sullivan, Andy Robinson, Dai Young, Gregor Townsend and Sean Lineen all come to mind right away.

I get the feeling the WRU is the only one happy to let the coach go for a whole calendar year (as was the requirement last time, for some bizarre reason).

While it might be good for the coach and his experience, we've only got Gats for 4 more years (less now) so losing him for 1/4 of that is not good.

To be honest I'd prefer it to be a coach from another nation, mainly so we don't have to put up with all of the abuse and moaning on here.

Griff wrote:To be honest I'd prefer it to be a coach from another nation, mainly so we don't have to put up with all of the abuse and moaning on here.

Same as that, leave our coaches alone.

Notch wrote:Stuart Lancaster, Ian McGeechan, Declan Kidney, Eddie O'Sullivan, Andy Robinson, Dai Young, Gregor Townsend and Sean Lineen all come to mind right away.

I'd ask Conor O'Shea to do it.

Rugby Fan wrote:

Notch wrote:Stuart Lancaster, Ian McGeechan, Declan Kidney, Eddie O'Sullivan, Andy Robinson, Dai Young, Gregor Townsend and Sean Lineen all come to mind right away.

I'd ask Conor O'Shea to do it.

Right!?

Notch wrote:

Griff wrote:To be honest I'd prefer it to be a coach from another nation, mainly so we don't have to put up with all of the abuse and moaning on here.

Same as that, leave our coaches alone.

Taking it in turns might be nice though. We get very little out of it for what we put in.

Rugby Fan wrote:

Notch wrote:Stuart Lancaster, Ian McGeechan, Declan Kidney, Eddie O'Sullivan, Andy Robinson, Dai Young, Gregor Townsend and Sean Lineen all come to mind right away.

I'd ask Conor O'Shea to do it.

Bet Chris Robshaw would love that.

Maybe the Irish players that share some poster's views on here should declare themselves unavailable for the tour and put pressure on the IRFU to tour Argentina in 2017.

I'm sure plenty of Irish players will be up for that!

I would like all the English players and coaches to distance themselves and for the RFU to get nothing from it. That would be ideal for me.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Maybe the Irish players that share some poster's views on here should declare themselves unavailable for the tour and put pressure on the IRFU to tour Argentina in 2017.

I'm sure plenty of Irish players will be up for that!

No maybe about it, if they had a shred of responsibility to their national team they would absolutely make themselves unavailable even if they had no tour. They won't of course because the Lions is the one outlet where they can be openly self-serving egotists, and you don't get the book deals if you pass on that opportunity.

The Great Aukster wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Maybe the Irish players that share some poster's views on here should declare themselves unavailable for the tour and put pressure on the IRFU to tour Argentina in 2017.

I'm sure plenty of Irish players will be up for that!

No maybe about it, if they had a shred of responsibility to their national team they would absolutely make themselves unavailable even if they had no tour. They won't of course because the Lions is the one outlet where they can be openly self-serving egotists, and you don't get the book deals if you pass on that opportunity.

Heaven forbid a player wants to do something for himself?!!!!

Your attitude itself is deeply selfish, the Lions are better with Irish involvement. The team needs your (Ireland's) expertise.

Getting dicked on an exclusively Irish tour to the SH won't improve your chances any more in a world cup IMO than playing along with the Lions.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Maybe the Irish players that share some poster's views on here should declare themselves unavailable for the tour and put pressure on the IRFU to tour Argentina in 2017.

I'm sure plenty of Irish players will be up for that!

No maybe about it, if they had a shred of responsibility to their national team they would absolutely make themselves unavailable even if they had no tour. They won't of course because the Lions is the one outlet where they can be openly self-serving egotists, and you don't get the book deals if you pass on that opportunity.

Heaven forbid a player wants to do something for himself?!!!!

Your attitude itself is deeply selfish, the Lions are better with Irish involvement. The team needs your (Ireland's) expertise.

Getting dicked on an exclusively Irish tour to the SH won't improve your chances any more in a world cup IMO than playing along with the Lions.

Why would we necessarily get "dicked" if we have our best team? That attitude is the exact problem. "We can't win alone, so let's try together".

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Maybe the Irish players that share some poster's views on here should declare themselves unavailable for the tour and put pressure on the IRFU to tour Argentina in 2017.

I'm sure plenty of Irish players will be up for that!

No maybe about it, if they had a shred of responsibility to their national team they would absolutely make themselves unavailable even if they had no tour. They won't of course because the Lions is the one outlet where they can be openly self-serving egotists, and you don't get the book deals if you pass on that opportunity.

Heaven forbid a player wants to do something for himself?!!!!

Your attitude itself is deeply selfish, the Lions are better with Irish involvement. The team needs your (Ireland's) expertise.

Getting dicked on an exclusively Irish tour to the SH won't improve your chances any more in a world cup IMO than playing along with the Lions.

Players can do whatever they want for themselves but not at the expense of their team.

If a player wants self-aggrandisement he can bask in the glory of Lions selection, and commiserate with his national team mates who weren't picked. It sets him above those mere mortals but divides his Test team into haves and have-nots. Back to the normal world after a mundane game of Test rugby, those in the Lions club can reminisce about their Everest with a dewy tear dropping into their pint, and kid themselves that was their best chance of ever beating the All Blacks. (Of course the Lions would also have little chance of beating any of the full strength Test sides from which they are selected if such a match could ever be organised.)

The Lions might be better with Irish involvement, but that involvement indubitably makes Ireland worse. If supporting ones country over a commercial brand is deeply selfish then I agree I am guilty as charged. The 'Lions' brand is simply a marketing juggernaut that cares nothing about rugby nor the harm it does to the sides from which it harvests players. I am deeply selfish about their welfare and compromising that for a wad of notes sticks in my craw.

Toulon are much maligned in the club game, but they have striking similarity to the modern Lions. They were a scratch side of galacticos brought together to compete with the cream of French rugby - many pundits comparing their 'on paper' quality to Test sides, yet it was several years before they started lifting silverware. Why? It simply takes time to build a competitive team as opposed to fielding a collection of individuals. Professional coaches have everything analysed and practised to death and it took Toulon years, against club opposition. Yet those proponents of the Lions expect guys who are normally enemies to become best buddies in a few days and learn systems in a couple of weeks that will in some way threaten the World Champions who have been playing together for years! This isn't the seventies where teams went on tour for months on end and played teams who had less practice than they had. The balance has so markedly shifted towards SH victories that sending cannon fodder south is now bordering on the voyeuristic rather than sporting.

I disagree that "getting dicked" (as you so eloquently put it) on an exclusively Irish tour to the SH won't improve Ireland as a team (neither did Sir Clive with England). At least they are learning to play together and test players in proper strength sides. The players who are carrying injuries will be properly looked after rather carry on regardless and take their once in a lifetime chance of being a Lion.

We aren't going to agree on this RR, so I'll leave it there.

Ok the final game in the summer tour before the 2013 lions saw Ireland get nilled to the tune of 60 points by the All Blacks. The middle game was extremely close and Ireland were unlucky, but in the 1st game you also shipped 42 points. Must have learned a lot.  

The tour after saw you comfortably beat the pumas in their own backyard. Good Job  

Only for Ireland to get hammered in the RWC by the same Pumas side.

I fail to see how a tour in 2013 (exclusively Irish) would have changed your fate when you exited the RWC, in a defeat called "emphatic" by Sky Sports, described as "put to the sword by Rampant Pumas" in the Telegraph and.... I could go on but I won't.

I fail to see how an exclusively Irish tour would have changed anything that transpired in the RWC. Or Scrapping Irish involvement in the Lions will better prepare you for the rugby world cup.

I get the whole season is too long argument and the Lions tour schedule is hard, I get that argument. However the argument that Ireland not being involved in the tour will somehow improve your chances in the RWC is baffling.

the-goon wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Maybe the Irish players that share some poster's views on here should declare themselves unavailable for the tour and put pressure on the IRFU to tour Argentina in 2017.

I'm sure plenty of Irish players will be up for that!

No maybe about it, if they had a shred of responsibility to their national team they would absolutely make themselves unavailable even if they had no tour. They won't of course because the Lions is the one outlet where they can be openly self-serving egotists, and you don't get the book deals if you pass on that opportunity.

Heaven forbid a player wants to do something for himself?!!!!

Your attitude itself is deeply selfish, the Lions are better with Irish involvement. The team needs your (Ireland's) expertise.

Getting dicked on an exclusively Irish tour to the SH won't improve your chances any more in a world cup IMO than playing along with the Lions.

Why would we necessarily get "dicked" if we have our best team? That attitude is the exact problem. "We can't win alone, so let's try together".

NZ is the toughest place in the world to tour.
The weather during that period will be dire.
The lions players will come off a long season.
They've not used to playing together and have few matches to gel in time.
NZ will be well rested, fresh and in mid season.

In terms of the past

05 - Lost 0-3
93 - Lost 1-2
83 - Lost 0-4
77 - Lost 1-3
71 - Won 2-1
66 - Lost 0-4
59 - Lost 1-3
50 - Lost 0-3

So out of 30 test matches post war the lions have won 5 matches, lost 23. This current team albeit will require a new captain, new openside and new flyhalf... will be as formidable as ever.
Can I see a team going to NZ and winning. Not a chance, the last team to go to NZ and dominate was SA in 09 and they were at the peak of their powers and world champions. European teams are way off the pace to be honest.. they can get there but not in 18 months.

If teams cannot compete with NZ at home and really only SA is at the moment capable of that, then what chances do teams have in NZ? Its bleak, very bleak.

If the Lions won a single test match it would be a real achievement. Its not defeatist to say so. Coaches will be in two minds of taking it up as to be honest, it will be a very difficult tour and very difficult to come away with any credibility intact/enhanced.

Interesting that Brian O'Driscoll doesn't even mention that he toured with the Lions when listing his personal and team achievements on his website.

I always laugh when the British tv stations always caption a player as a Lion as well as the country they played for.

I think BOD is saving his Lions experience for his new book "A Rugby Life of Fine Wine and Sour Grapes" - Should be a good read.

Sin é wrote:Interesting that Brian O'Driscoll doesn't even mention that he toured with the Lions when listing his personal and team achievements on his website.

I always laugh when the British tv stations always caption a player as a Lion as well as the country they played for.

You don't have to agree but many fans and players still undoubtedly consider playing for the Lions an honour and worthy of a mention. For some it represents the distinction of being one of the best in your position out of a four-nation pool. For others it's a pleasure to play alongside the best from other nations and put traditional rivalries aside for a short time.

You may not feel the same towards the concept but it's evident that many in all four participating nations still support it, or it probably wouldn't have survived in its current form for this long.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Ok the final game in the summer tour before the 2013 lions saw Ireland get nilled to the tune of 60 points by the All Blacks. The middle game was extremely close and Ireland were unlucky, but in the 1st game you also shipped 42 points. Must have learned a lot.  

The tour after saw you comfortably beat the pumas in their own backyard. Good Job  

Only for Ireland to get hammered in the RWC by the same Pumas side.

I fail to see how a tour in 2013 (exclusively Irish) would have changed your fate when you exited the RWC, in a defeat called "emphatic" by Sky Sports, described as "put to the sword by Rampant Pumas" in the Telegraph and.... I could go on but I won't.

I fail to see how an exclusively Irish tour would have changed anything that transpired in the RWC. Or Scrapping Irish involvement in the Lions will better prepare you for the rugby world cup.

I get the whole season is too long argument and the Lions tour schedule is hard, I get that argument. However the argument that Ireland not being involved in the tour will somehow improve your chances in the RWC is baffling.

It's not just the RWC that the Lions tour affects. Players play for the Lions and are then unavailable for their province and Ireland afterwards. Take Tommy Bowe for example who made a miraculous recovery from a broken hand to play against Australia

Warren Gatland said "The surgeon said the type of injury he had could normally be a six-to-eight week injury so the medical team have done a magnificent job for him to be fit in three weeks."

Yeah right Warren! Since then his form has dipped dramatically and he has had one injury after another, including the same hand... hmmm?
He's not unique, such is the pressure to play that players will threaten their careers to impress a foreign coach, usually in whose interest it is to play them to save his own national charges who may have niggles.

So losing the Lions players is not just for the Summer tour that year , but also for the AIs, and if there are injuries sustained possibly for the following 6N. (It is no coincidence how successful France have been in post Lions years.)

Predicting what might have happened had Ireland had an extra year to prepare for the RWC is anybody's guess so you're not alone in not being able to see what difference it would have made. However it seems fairer to me if Ireland had the same number of games to prepare and develop players between RWCs as their SH counterparts do.

The Great Aukster wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Maybe the Irish players that share some poster's views on here should declare themselves unavailable for the tour and put pressure on the IRFU to tour Argentina in 2017.

I'm sure plenty of Irish players will be up for that!

No maybe about it, if they had a shred of responsibility to their national team they would absolutely make themselves unavailable even if they had no tour. They won't of course because the Lions is the one outlet where they can be openly self-serving egotists, and you don't get the book deals if you pass on that opportunity.

The players might not be up for it, but I'd sure as hell be up for watching it! Love touring Argentina- lifetime goal to go out there to see a tour.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:The tour after saw you comfortably beat the pumas in their own backyard. Good Job  

Only for Ireland to get hammered in the RWC by the same Pumas side.

Well how are we meant to get them back for it if we don't tour there again?

I mean by all means send them off to play some Barbarians rugby in the rain in New Zealand but give them back in one piece. The one thing you can say in favour of it is we need the money- and we do need the money. But if our record is so bad in New Zealand (and it is) we won't be missed.

Well I think this news story is a shame. I liked the idea of The Lions coaching panel comprising Garland (Head Coach), Schmidt (backs) and Cotter (forwards). A trio of Kiwis to topple their homeland!

Lancaster is in the running according to the Daily Mail ,it makes sense the only coach at the moment from the home nations who thrashed the all blacks.
He should just take English and welsh players because how could he justify Scotish and Irish players when their nation has never ever toppled the all blacks?

I would support Lancaster, I would actually watch that tour.

I'd watch the tour regardless of the head coach. I'd feel a bit cheap not doing so just because of a coach.

Please let it be Lancaster. The fewer of the Welsh staff going the better.

DirtyRucker7 wrote:He should just take English and welsh players because how could he justify Scotish and Irish players when their nation has never ever toppled the all blacks?

Yes, let him give us an even bigger chip on the shoulder that'll pay off for England in the Six Nations

This DirtyRucker character smells funny.

I doubt there will be many players on that 2017 tour that have beat the ABs. May as well call it off.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:...I fail to see how an exclusively Irish tour would have changed anything that transpired in the RWC. Or Scrapping Irish involvement in the Lions will better prepare you for the rugby world cup...

I disagree with you but I'm pleased in one respect with what you say. You haven't argued that the Lions tours give players valuable experience, which they can then take back to their national sides, and help them better compete against the southern hemisphere. That argument has always seemed to me to be utterly wrong, so I count it as progress that you haven't thought to bring it up.

The Lions tour takes place smack bang in prime development time for the World Cup cycle. The first season after a cup for northern hemisphere sides usually sees a squad shake-up as players retire and new coaches might be appointed. Still, a lot of players will have had little rest for 18 months, so the first summer tour after a cup is not a great chance to give the side a run. A lot of players would benefit from letting injuries heal, and having a proper pre-season.

The best time to see how everything is coming together is the second summer. You've had two six Nations tournaments by then, and one set of Autumn Internationals. And, of course, the Lions then comes calling.

Not only does that mean sides lose a major opportunity to develop cohesion and discover problems - exactly the chance the Lions' opponents are getting - they often get key players back in terrible physical shape. Some miss next season's internationals, while those left standing really could do with a break over summer. However, that summer becomes critical because it's only the second opportunity for a coach to give his squad a run out on tour. He won't get another one before the cup.

This is a crazy way to develop a side for a four year cycle.

mikey_dragon wrote:I doubt there will be many players on that 2017 tour that have beat the ABs. May as well call it off.

Some of the English guys probably have after-dinner comitments but they're only a phone call away.

The coaching team don't coach - they select.

Surely no one in this day and age believes that coaches can have any influence on a scratch team in a few days?

The best chance for the Lions is to do what Gatland did last time - pick the Welsh team with a few improvements here and there and hope the opposition have an off day. It was ironic that last time it only took a few additions to Wales to get them over the line against Australia, yet Wales could have been developing the depth themselves if they had their own tour.

Sir Clive tried to replicate his victory over the All Blacks in 2003 by picking a lot of the same players for the Lions but couldn't replicate the cohesion England had built up over years. His template wasn't wrong just that the ABs are hard to beat even with a full team never mind a (part) scratch one.

Cyril wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:I doubt there will be many players on that 2017 tour that have beat the ABs. May as well call it off.

Some of the English guys probably have after-dinner comitments but they're only a phone call away.

Uh oh, best warn the dwarves again.