First Sydney rained on the Lions’ parade. Then so did the Wallabies. And, for that, we should be grateful. Whatever it was that caused such an about-turn in fortunes, the Lions tumbling down from an Everest peak, it has lent perspective on the 2025 tourists. The forlorn loss has pricked the overblown hype that was beginning to surround them, that notion that they might be ‘the greatest’ ever to have worn the red jersey. Andy Farrell can be excused using that phrase as a motivational tool. The rest of us cannot.
That is not to deny the fact that the squad are an admirable bunch, nor to withhold from them the accolade of being one of only a few Lions sides to have won a series, back-to-back in Australia, a landmark of sorts. They got the job done. Again, perspective. If the milestone of successive victories were to be achieved in South Africa or New Zealand, then hats off. That would be quite the thing. In the professional age the British and Irish Lions have found themselves pitted against the reigning world champions on all but two occasions – in 2013 in Australia and again this time. From 1997 onwards, the Lions have had to beat the current top dogs. That’s the measure of what previous Lions sides have been up against. Those are historical Himalayan moments. Might New Zealand have the Webb Ellis trophy in their locker when the Lions come visiting in 2029? It’s not a bad bet to place.
You might say that all this is smart-arse observation, wise after the event, clever-dick hindsight reflections. Not really. There was a sense that while the Lions were worthy victors of the series in Melbourne, the pip-squeak nature of it meant that only a comprehensive win in Sydney, of the like they achieved there in 2013, would confirm big-time status and would trigger debate as to where they stand in the Lions’ pantheon. It didn’t happen. They deserve praise, of course, but not genuflection. They were pragmatic without ever really raising the hairs on the back of the neck. They were worthy rather than world-beaters, meriting applause rather than fanfares.

New Zealand in 2025 will be a wholly different ball game. And what heights might the Wallabies have reached themselves if the man-mountain Will Skelton had been ready for action from the off in Brisbane? Or if that pest extraordinaire, Nic White, rugby’s moustached Ned Kelly, had been preferred for duty? The pair of them ensured a torrid night for the Lions, Skelton bashing skulls and White annoying the living bejesus out of everyone. Who’d have thought that it would be an Australian side that would be more tactically comfortable in wet-weather conditions than a northern hemisphere team. The former Exeter Chiefs scrum-half played as if it were just another routine evening at Sandy Park rather than in Sydney with its XXXL rain.
What has been uplifting across the last two months has been the Lions spirit that has been engendered in the squad as well as in the wider public. The romance of it all still resonates. The appeal is enduring.
The biblical conditions and the unexpected outcome rounded off a strange old tour. The loss was chastening while the theatrics were out-of-kilter with what had been a semi-humdrum six weeks of sport. The calibre of opposition was not sustained enough. Again, New Zealand will be an entirely different proposition. Or, it must be made to be so in a cast-iron contract that stipulates the All Blacks have to be made available for the provincial fixtures. Joe Schmidt’s decision to hold back the bulk of his Wallaby squad back-fired on him. Australia were woefully off-the-pace at the Suncorp Stadium for the first test. What might have been for them, eh?
So much for the various caveats and nuanced viewpoints. What has been uplifting across the last two months has been the Lions spirit that has been engendered in the squad as well as in the wider public. The romance of it all still resonates. The appeal is enduring. And that is not an insignificant thing as the gate receipts alone from the three tests indicates. Almost a quarter of a million people (224,848) forked out very good money to be there in person. They bought into the experience and that has never been a given in the modern era. Its worth, emotionally as well as literally, is invaluable. The rugby landscape is under siege from various entrepreneurs who want to set up franchise systems round the world. Even the established administrators are re-jigging the calendar with their World Rugby Nations Championship from next year. Pressure, pressure, pressure.

That is why Andy Farrell is to be lauded from here to kingdom come. What the Ireland head coach managed to inculcate, that sense of identity, those bonds of belonging, that commitment to the cause, that coming together in a meaningful manner for the greater good – the very future of the Lions themselves – is not easily achieved. Graham Henry didn’t manage it in 2001. Nor Clive Woodward four years later. Both men have won World Cups. But they didn’t win the hearts and minds as Farrell as done. Not even close. The alchemy trick is not for everyone.
There are plenty of commercial interests out there who would shunt the Lions altogether or downgrade their presence on the fixture list. Do they really need so long on tour, so many games? Yes, they do. They had it in Australia and only just managed to nick the series.
Of course Farrell did not get everything right. His selections smacked of one-eyedness in the closing weeks.
Farrell is in pole position to lead the Lions to New Zealand in 2029. To be honest, there are not that many other contenders. Farrell blends fun with drive. You can’t fake what he does, that mix of hard-headedness and a warm spirit. The players’ word-of-mouth recall from this trip is worth its weight in gold. Their teammates back in Ireland, Wales, England and Scotland will have envy in their very beings to spur them towards New Zealand in four years’ time. Priceless.
Of course Farrell did not get everything right. His selections smacked of one-eyedness in the closing weeks. My own view (expressed post second test) was that he ought to have freshened things up for Sydney, both to bring new energy but also to spread the Lions’ love amongst the group. Tom Curry performed heroics once again at the Accor but it looked as if he were in need of six months in bed as he was led from the field on Saturday. Jac Morgan or Josh van der Flier starting would not have been beyond the pale. In my opinion, Ellis Genge should have been the starting loosehead anyway. Scott Cummings deserved a rumble, so too his Scottish teammate, scrum-half Ben White. Sione Tuipulotu likewise while Jamie George’s throwing prowess might have helped shore up a disintegrating lineout. On the selection front Farrell needed to be more open-minded.

But let us not quibble too much. Once again, this has been an enriching sporting adventure. It has served its purpose in that regard. These blokes have done the jersey proud, with their buy-in and with their relish. Maro Itoje has played a full part in that. Dan Sheehan, Tadhg Berirne, Finn Russell, all deserve individual accolades. Saturday may have been a damp squib on many fronts. But the British and Irish Lions are alive and flourishing. New Zealand 2029 is already on the horizon and that makes for a special feeling. Chapeau, Andy Farrell and the 2025 tourists.
News, stats, videos and more! Download the new RugbyPass app, in collaboration with the British and Irish Lions, on the App Store (iOS) and Google Play (Android) now!
Always good to read the views of Mick Cleary the last of the great Telegraph rugby writers after John Reason and John Mason.
Once upon a time the Lions were a team made up of English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish rugby players. Now if I am even remotely accurate it’s a team of players from around the world, who might in fact not have made their own country’s side, and or players from the second and third tier nations moving to Europe for the bigger pay day (who could blame them?) . So for me the Lions tour has lost its lustre. Australia has never fared as well as NZ and SA with touring lions, but I feel they really stepped up, and are probably a wee bit unlucky not to have taken what is for me a closer series than the score board reflects. One could hardly image what a combined NZ , SA and Australian touring side would look like were it to head north and play a similar format. God forbid you even included Argentina into that mix. I’m even tempted to suggest a NZ PI side would be pretty formidable as well.
I must say GH I felt the same as well. It felt more like some global all star team touring than the british and irish. I get that plays can play for an adopted country, and it would be a very hardline to implement otherwise, but it would mean more to me receiving the team if they had stronger roots.
Farrell probably didn't mix things up enough and probably had a bias towards Irish players but, then again, the Lions won the series. As for the last test, it was much more important for the Wallabies to win - not just for their own sake, but for the future of International Rugby Union!🇳🇬
I doubt they are thinking that way. They will be thinking they were second best.
As a fan sure, the result means more than who was actually better, I would understand being happy to get out of jail.
It wasn’t important aussie won, just that they backed it up. If Lions were cracking and/or got lucky again I think it would have been a lot better result than the onesided outcome we ended up getting.
Well done, Mr Cleary. That’s the best and least one-eyed analysis of the tour and tourists I have read thus far.
Farrell gets top marks for bonding the players, and making it a successful tour, no more than a C for tactics, and definitely an E for selection. They got the job done, but it was not a vintage tour.
But its that bonding part which was lacking most right, selection, not tactics?
I have to say I agree almost 100% with the article
This lions team much like Woodwards squad of 2005 was drawn primarily from a home nations side that was 2yrs past its best.
This error was then compounded as Mick clearey states by farrell then being too one eyed in his selections for the tests.
With the exception of Sheehan and beirne, the Irish fwds were no more than adequate.
And Aki was poor in the centre.
Too heavy on irishmen, too poor on quality.
I agree it was not vintage lions and the wallabies were frankly robbed of the second test.
Even the Irish players were picked on reputation it's still earned. They accounted for 4 of the 10 test tries or 20 of their 68 test PTS.
Without them I'm not even sure they'd have won the series.
One Irish commenter on here remarked that Farrell was angling for the England job and picked too many English lol wtf.
It is amazing how the English can celebrate mediocrity with such verve!
Let’s set the bull aside and look at the results. The tour will record a two from four internationals result, viz:
Argentina Loss
Australia win
Australia win
Australia Loss
In anyones books that is a 50% return and let us remind that the second Australian test hang from a thread and could quite easily have resulted in a 25% return.
This was close to an embarrassment for the Lions, shameful really when you consider that they draw the cream from four nations!
Like the results that people tried to claim Foster was still a good coach/had an OK first two years with lol
Another disrespectful article, already looking to the next tour and acting like it’s going to have more meaning.
I enjoyed the way the Lions played, I enjoy Finn’s style (and Smiths work), most similar in threat since Carter but with more lovely ball skills/size, but mostly it was about their intent to take it to everyone, at anytime. Admittedly we didn’t see too much of that when the didn’t think they were dominant, but when it was a jockey for dominance they backed themselves. So from one who’s only seen from the 93 team this was certainly a step up.
And boy, that’s against a strong looking Australian team. I’m not relishing playing them in the RC.
That is a pretty crazy stat though, and you can see where some might have confused it for being the purpose of Lions tours. If the north becomes dominant enough to win consistently in the future, well, I can’t help but think how the tours to the ‘non winning’ SH might look to them then!
MC missed out 2005 - England were the reigning RWC champions, not NZ where they toured.
In the pro era they've played the RWC champions on 6/9 tours (97-25) conversely they have only once played the RWC champions to be (21) so that's 1/9.
Given Lions happens midway between RWC most teams are rebuilding so whether you look at 6/9 or 1/9 it's a pretty meaningless statistic.
Not at all disrespectful. That is reserved for all the journalists and keyboard warriors that continually claimed the Lions to be “world class” and the Wallabies unworthy competitors, many opining that Australia should be struck off the Lions tour calendar as being not good enough. Sorry but the article is measured and gives praised where deserved.
About as disrespectful as your reply sits in its one dimensional splendour! Seriously, the tone overall was anything but disrespectful to the Aussies other than a passing, and statistically valid, reference to the enduring superiority of Kiwi rugby over Aus.