Why a rush defence will not upset the All Blacks

All good but they were satisfied with a DRAW...if they accept mediocracy as a win then give everybody a ribbon...make the losers feel like winners eh?

So when the Wallabies go in expecting a losss and come out with a losss it feels like a win??? because they expected a bigger loss? Sorry but if I put money on a draw and its a draw then I expect my draw selection to pay out...not difficult to work out

A Draw??????????

As to whether a draw for the Lions could be seen as a "win" I would go to post match comments > Warbutron said he did not know what to make of it but Reid said clearly that it was a big disappointment . I think that sums it up ..The Lions were obviously more satisfied. As I believe were their supporters.

Nick, can confirm that most of my family back in Ireland considered the series a 'win'. Most of them were expecting the direst of results (results equivalent of last night, for example...) and said they would be happy with a 0-3 loss if the Lions were competitive for 1-2 games. Instead, the Lions break NZs home streak and drew at Eden Park. I think it was an incredible result for the Lions. Even if the history books will record it a 'draw', it certainly doesn't feel that way to most of the Lions fans I've spoken to.

What do you consider the series to be then Jacko - after all of your blowout predictions?

A certain amount of relativity has to be part of these judgments doesn't it? If you go expecting a win and come back with a draw, it feels like a loss and vice versa. I think the vast majority of people (both from NZ and outside it) were expecting a comfortable home win - for the reasons outlined. So the draw feels like a loss for many NZers (as some have told me themselves). For me, the pleasure was seeing the Lions Saturday team become all it could have become in the circumstances (which were largely adverse). It might have been even better if we'd had some of the personnel available that I mentioned. It would have taken another three or four Tests for the AB's to score as many tries against the Lions as they did yesterday in one match against the WB's, that's for sure!

Yes agree with that, expectations being a much different beast than result. You'd never see the ABs saying they out thought the opposition when they draw a series...that just doesn't make sense. So going forward how does that expectation translate to being one where drawing a series is seen as a failure? I don't think that's going to be the case for some time. Yes the Lions had their player issues but Vunipola wasn't in the touring squad, neither was Coles and I didn't mention him, nor other players that might have made the squad had they been plying their professional career here. Lions were incredibly lucky with injuries to just have Hogg as the only potential test casualty from the series itself. It's those little things that all tipped one way that I believe tipped the series from a narrow win to a draw. Had, for instance exactly the case been the reverse, all other things being equal, Lions probably would have lost, with the same effort from both sides. All conjecture obviously and the ABs failed to overcome those obstacles due to the Lions applying a level of pressure that no other team, not even England in my opinion, could have.

Your last sentence is the key Nicholas...The Lions count a draw as a win when a draw is a draw.....Do you really think the Lions believe they had a win? I would say they failed to win with a lot in their favor and that is no reason to celebrate winning when they didnt win. Surely drawing with the ABs isnt concidered a win

Although the red, Crotty and Smiths absence, the refereeing debacle at the end were all isolated events it’s probable that had none happened we’d have a different result. I don't think this is a game we should play T-man. Extend that privilege to the Lions, and we'd have Billy Vunipola available (prob the best forward in the NH for two seasons), maybe Eddie Jones or Gregor Townsend to coach the attack (clearly a tour weakness) or maybe Joe Schmidt as a strategic consultant. We'd also have two or three weeks clear prep before the tour ever began. And yes, I do believe the AB coaching group was to some extent out-thought, or persuaded to react to what the Lions were doing (it doesn't happen often). In relation to the Lions' prep time and tour expectations (including yours), the tour was clearly a 'win'!

Yes it's in the expectations that the ABs and fans lost out big time, so commentary on that is fine, but I think if you're going to take the high road and claim some sort of superiority, then you should at least win I would think. I mean who claims to have out thought a team and doesn't win? What then would it have required to actually win? Outplaying them as well would be a start perhaps?

Actually TMan if we were to be real harsh, the BIL went home with a tourr 40pc win record,poor. One dodgy French ref call away from being the worst lions team of all time. Such are the fine margins of a close series. Didn't understand why the Lions didn't kick for the corner and go for the win off they milked penalty right at the end of test 3. No points at stake, not a country at stake. True rugby immortality awaited in those 2 minutes. The 71 Lions are revered to this very day. These guys clearly saw a draw as a good outcome, and thus will be forgotten in the annuls of time.

Yes that's it in a nutshell, ABs definitely got out thought, but I also think the scales were tilted under the bullet points Highlander raised in his article. Although the red, Crotty and Smiths absence, the refereeing debacle at the end were all isolated events it's probable that had none happened we'd have a different result. For all those, for the brilliance of the Rush defence, it still resulted in a drawn series, a few minutes lead in the series at any one point, and only one convincing win in the three tests, interestingly, when none of those factors were present. The interest for me is what does it mean going forward? I don't think it's a template sides can just keep turning up with and expect to compete. For all that, still a draw. Not sure if 'out thought' is quite the case, or they'd have won the series. You don't out think a side to a draw. In terms of each sides expectations possibly yes, but that would mean admitting the Lions expected less than a draw, not sure they did.

Nick, you make an excellent point about the ABs over adjusting and a mental win to the Lions. That has been coming out of the NZ camp since, that they didn't play enough rugby, and have belatedly acknowledged that. And you can see it in the games, when they went down to 14 Read made the call to go very narrow both times. In game 3 they couldn't get it back after the Kaino card. Probably have to call that a captaincy error. About to head to off to the Sydney test right now. Thanks for your thoughts.

Thanks Highlander. One of the obvious conclusions from the matches previous to the Test series on tour was that the success of Farrell's rush defence persuaded the AB's to play the game down much narrower channels than normal. That would have come from concrete feedback from the All Blacks playing for the Crusaders and Maori teams on consecutive Saturdays before the first Test. When the AB's were so successful at Eden Park the first time round it provided a kind of confirmation bias, and they spurned the chances they had out wide in the second Test, even with 14 men. Perhaps the Lions' biggest 'win' in the series lay in winning the psychological battle between the two coaching groups. I believe they persuaded the AB coaching group to over-adjust to what they were doing defensively on tour, and it led the AB's too far away from their natural game in the Test series as a result. That was the real 'win' for the rush D, in the over-reaction. And ultimately, the stat of 5 tries conceded in threes Tests and 8 in the six Saturday matches overall doesn't lie. The New Zealand Saturday sides all had ample opportunities to unlock Faz's D but never really managed it.

a grand wee article, Highlander I'm hoping forbig things from Lima also Think Beauden is too smart and too talented not to rise above these shortcomings in time. He's had what? fifty tests? The best could lie ahead. His kicking was deadly for a while.....needs a bigger smile?

I agree. I thought the All Blacks struggled with that aspect of the Lions game plan. Why wouldn't the Wallabies adopt the same tactic?

That test he did v SA was great footy from a Newby and his composure under pressure that day told me, and I dare say the coaches, that he has the game to trouble anyone and the temprement to boot

When I look at an AB loss I look for the controllables, the quality of the opposition isn't really one of them. So looking at the list there's a lot of uncontrollables there..the rain, the refs, to an extent the sending offs, the quality of the opposition defence. When the team sits down in the changing room and analyses what they can do better, other than ignoring SBW for a couple of hours, days, weeks, years (insert your preference) there's not a lot there they can dig their teeth into, so it has to be about the rain gameplan, options in certain scenarios, but in the end, and I agree with your summary, it's about execution. These guys have been around long enough, and found ways to score points, and win enough times they know exactly what to do. It may be that the uncontrollables compounded to work against them this time with the qualities of the Lions being enough to win, or draw, where otherwise any other side would still not have taken advantage.

I would agree with that Jacko, but then I would given my Super Rugby alliances. Lima was the only non test 10 to pull the Lions rush D apart too in the Highlanders win.