The Lions Tour: A Tired Excuse for French Rugby Supremacy?
Is it time to retire an old adage? The notion that France's rugby success is linked to the Lions tour schedule is an intriguing one. Since the professional era, France has claimed the Six Nations Grand Slam five times, each time following a Lions tour. But is this more than just a coincidence?
The Lions tour, an iconic event in rugby, presents a unique challenge. Willie John McBride, in his introduction to Clem Thomas's history, called it "the supreme prize." Yet, modern tours differ significantly from those of the past. In 1971, the Lions played 26 matches over three months, while recent tours have seen fewer games and more players.
But here's where it gets controversial. Some argue that the Lions tour takes a toll on players, impacting their performance in subsequent competitions. However, Ireland's Tadhg Furlong dismisses this, suggesting the issue is more psychological. He believes players might underestimate the challenge the year after a tour.
France and Italy also had busy summers, with the French playing four Tests in five weeks. Despite this, French players like Théo Attissogbe feature prominently in minutes played stats. This raises questions about player welfare, with World Rugby recommending a maximum of 30 full games per season.
And this is the part most people miss. The Lions tour isn't the sole factor in France's success. In 'even' years, they play England and Ireland at home, which historically favors them. Their potential Grand Slam win this year would be a testament to their skill, not just freshness.
So, is it time to stop using the Lions tour as an excuse? The evidence suggests it's a tired argument. What do you think? Is this a valid point, or is there more to France's rugby supremacy?
