Time to discuss alternatives to Australia as a Lions destination

Telegraph

2 days ago

To get some perspective on this series you only need to look at the respective match XVs and benches available to both teams. The fact is that you would struggle to select more than a handful of Australian players over their Lions' counterparts in a combined 23-man squad. This is nobody's fault, but people should stop pretending that it is not so. The Lions' previous aim of recording a whitewash in the series should be an imperative not a hope, now that the gulf in class has been laid bare. It is right to give Joe Schmidt and his squad credit for the improvements they have made in the past 18 months, but they are still a long way off top Test status and a shadow of some of their illustrious predecessors.
The Wallabies will get better in the remaining two Tests but so should the Lions. Their line-out set piece malfunctioned in a way that could have been telling in a tighter contest and their inaccuracy around try-scoring chances can be rectified. In terms of relative merits of what might come, the gap between the sides should not close if both sides improve as they ought to.
Of all the statistics you can scrutinise from the first Test, the most telling is that the Lions made around twice as much ground after contact as the Aussies. This meant that breakdowns were constantly moving forward in the Lions' favour, with the Australian defence pressured continually. If that equation cannot be neutralised, it is difficult to see how Australia are going to be able to play from an even field, and even if they do so, you have the fact the Lions' bench is going to be far more experienced and talented than anything the Aussies can summon.
US Eagles would be ideal opponents – if they improve
I am aware from speaking to several Lions' committee members there have been discussions about whether to strike out in different directions in the future. The problem is that South Africa and New Zealand will remain premier touring destinations, so you are talking about a once in every 12 years tour. It might be that Australia has recovered its place at rugby union's top table by then – but what if things go backwards?
None of this is straightforward. Talk of taking on France is misguided. A format that contains only Six Nations players would imitate the world's oldest and premier rugby union tournament, which has been consistently popular and commercially successful. The United States would be ideal, if the Eagles could deliver long hoped for standards, but what if you commit to it and improvements do not come? There are many factors that work against the US vision and I cannot see them being solved even in the medium term.
Touring the Pacific Islands and Argentina would be good for the image of the game but commercially challenging and the Lions are about making money in the professional era. One challenge is the R360 professional circus, which is said to be imminent. Where do the Lions fit in a rugby world that might see all its top players playing against each other 16 times a year? What is the attraction of Lions players taking on opponents who might already be regular team-mates or adversaries?