In the first in a new series of comments for www.pembrokeshiresport.co.uk, Fraser Watson looks back on a historic night in Sydney for the British and Irish Lions.
It was 80 minutes that cemented a legacy.
Following the nail biting drama of Brisbane and Melbourne, the British and Irish Lions tour of Australia ended in glorious fashion on Saturday as Warren Gatland’s men hammered the Wallabies 41-16 in Sydney.
The manner of victory was as sublime as it was surprising. And make no mistake, this was a game that the Lions simply had to win. Unlike four years ago in South Africa, valiant failure would not have been accepted. Prior to this summer, Australia were widely viewed as a side in transition whose squad had been decimated by injury. The Lions arrived down under as clear favourites, and a fourth successive series defeat since 1997 would have seen them vilified in many sporting quarters.
Fine line between success or failure
In sport there is fine line between success and failure, between becoming heroes or villains. It is a concept that Gatland would have become all too aware of this week. His controversial, and yet justified omission of Brian O’Driscoll brought howls of derision from pundits, fans and past players alike. The frenzy in the intermediate aftermath of the announcement was to be expected, people are entitled to express opinions and that’s what makes sport so fascinating. However, the fact that right up until Saturday morning there were many, including experienced professional players, still taking to their social network sites to vehemently criticise selection was borderline deplorable.
Gatland stood strong
The theory that the end result meant some form of redemption for Gatland is laughable. He had nothing to be redeemed for. He was head coach of the British Lions, his job was to make decisions, albeit difficult ones, and pick what he felt was the best side to win the test series. Further still, those who ridiculously suggested he had insulted the tradition and legacy of the Lions, had their knives well and truly blunted.
In fact, the brand of the Lions remains as unique as ever. Tours will always create mass interest, and trigger mass support. And it is because of this, that changes must be made to preserve the legacy for generations to come.
Sir Ian suggests . . .
Sir Ian McGeechan’s suggestion that a domestic season needs to be brought forward the year of a Lions’ campaign needs serious consideration. This was the shortest tour in Lions history, and reducing it any further would leave future squads short of preparation and build-up time.
In the professional era, clubs are understandably reluctant to release players from their commitments. But the Lions’ Tour is the pinnacle, and clubs need to respect that and work towards a solution that allow their players a full domestic campaign, but also a rest period before they leave for New Zealand, Australia or South Africa.
Outside-test considerations
The other concern is the attitude of the provincial sides the Lions face. Again, the riches in the professional era are now so great that any non-competitive games for sides in Europe or the southern hemisphere are seen as a hindrance. With the exception of the Queensland Reds and ACT Brumbies, the Australian sides fielded weakened teams which created ill feeling and non-contests. We can only sincerely hope that the New Zealand as a country treats the Lions’ brand with more respect in 2017. Otherwise, playing build-up games in another country before a test series may need to be considered. This would be extremely sad, but ultimately necessary to ensure all tour matches become meaningful.
And also, the Lions, professional or not, must continue to embrace the culture of the country they arrive in. Visiting schools, making public appearances and engaging with the local communities enhances their aura and how they are perceived. And importantly, it keeps players in touch with reality.
Brian understands the Lions’ standard
But these are all arguments which will no doubt develop over the next four years. For now, let us bask in the glory of that great night in Sydney. And anyone who questions whether the Lions still have a place in the modern game could have done a lot worse than observe the behaviour of O’Driscoll following the final whistle. Deep down, he must have been racked with personal disappointment. And yet, his demeanour was one of joy with no hint of bitterness. Because, unlike many who so vociferously opposed the selection policy, he understands the Lions are about more than one person. He understands the Lions are about more than one, two, or even three countries. And above all, he understands the Lions are about a group who stick together, and a group who ultimately will fail, or succeed, together.
And that is what makes them so special.