Kirkpatrick said that try against the Lions was probably his best-known, but he always considered that his most important try was against the Springboks in the Second Test in 1970.

Don't you mean Buck?

@@WaferBrik Yes, Buck Shelford not Brooke

wel.l...isnt' it the case of all of us ? 🙂

@marcwilson368 Not at all, the refs always were against the french and it was always the brits who hide behind the referee especially the english. France got ban from the five Nations Championship in 1931 cause they were too violent for the english taste. Do you think the french team ask for their own ban cause they could not handle the other team's violence ? During the 70' era, the whole pack brutaly demolish every one who dare to oppose them. When Bobby Windsor launched a massive kick in the face of Alain Esteve, the former stood up, smiled back and gave him a wink, lmfao. The pack of 77 were headstomping every one on sight. In the early 80' in the XIII rugby, a famous french team was so violent that the TV stop broadcasting the matches in France. Hell a guy was even killed in 87 in the national championship. Google Bègles Toulon 91 and see for yourself one of the last brutal match that were back in the days in France Championship. Those guys were not afraid to take punches and when the shit hit the fans, they were not the one whinning in the skirt of the referees.

Absolutely correct

I think there is plenty of space.

Bring back the biff.

Should have stood up for Keith but turned his back, something he himself has admitted and wished he did.

Maybe because it generates more cash for the host nations than any other event. Without the tour, the host rugby teams would have even less money than they do now. Ask the host nations if they want the Lions to visit or not.

@@theofarmmanager267 I am from one of those "host nations". You seem to have missed the point, or have understood the point but have no answer for the issue and are simply deflecting. Money wasn't the point of my comment. Focus. Rugby was the point. Stay with me ... Why bother when you know you are going to lose? Why not incorporate France into the selection? It would make the rugby a greater challenge and therefore generate more interest in the sport. Try to focus on the game rather than the money. Dragging it back to money constantly is boring, and assuming that it is only the "host nation" who benefit is miles off the mark. It is twice as lucrative for the Lions teams. No stadiums to clean, police escorts to arrange, game day logistics etc. Just sell jerseys and turn up. Don't get it twisted there though. The question was about sport, not cash

@@williamboulter8134 certainly if your original point had been clearer, then my reply would have been different. It’s an interesting thought that you should only compete providing you know that you can win. It’s not a concept that South Africa football or South Africa cricket seems to have adopted. In terms of money earned “The Dublin-based company that operates the British & Irish Lions rugby tours made a profit last year of £8.2 million (€9.6m) in spite of the challenges posed by the pandemic, which resulted in the three test matches in South Africa being played without spectators in the stadiums. Latest accounts for British & Irish Lions show that it recorded turnover of £20.1 million (€23.4m) in the year to the end of September 2021. This compared with income of just €886,868 in the previous year. The company’s revenues would typically be weighed towards the year of a tour - with the Lions touring every four years to one of Australia, New Zealand or South Africa - and would normally include income from trips organised for Lions fans and associated ticket income. In 2017, when the Lions toured New Zealand, the company made a profit of £7.8 million on revenue of £22.1 million. The entity is owned by the Irish, English, Scottish and Welsh rugby unions, and drew its income last year predominantly from sponsorship, broadcasting, merchandising and licensing rights” I can find no published figures from South Africa rugby but I would hazard a guess that it made money. A lot of money.

@@williamboulter8134 I am also from one of the host nations. Against NZ, Aust & SA, the Lions have won 36%, lost 54% & drawn 10% of the matches. A losing record for sure but hardly a "why bother" scenario. Not sure where you're from but in NZ the Lions is about the most looked forward to tour of all and I'd wager that the last time most NZ Super Rugby teams played to a full stadium was the 2017 Lions tour.

@@davidporter4162 It is a why bother scenario Dave, because they can't win and the Lions always revert to high school rugby tactics because they don't play together all the time and the countries that they play for play very different types of rugby. Ireland - very tactical and explosive with the back row and inside 4 backs. England - Very forward oriented team with explosive pace in the backline to finish. Scotland - out and out pace injected into the backs with Finn Russell calling the shots. Wales - try to win by not having the ball and always going backwards. The rugby is always garbage. Always. The tickets might sell out, but ask yourself why? Is it because it is great rugby or is it because it only comes around every 12 years?

The Brits didn't enjoy it much when they got a dose of their own stamping either. There's nothing very enjoyable about it, ever.

Mate us kiwis love a good rucking! you need to harden up