‘Lions need whitewash to be lauded for decades’ – Dawson column

The British and Irish Lions won a Test series, which is truly remarkable, but they also need to completely whitewash the Wallabies for decades to come.

In comparison to the series-winning teams of 1989, 1997, and 2013, how good are they?

Given the opposition, it’s difficult to make judgments. Few years have gone by for Australia. In three high-intensity Test matches in New Zealand or South Africa, I would have preferred to see the Lions win.

However, you can only defeat what is in front of you, and Australia did so in Melbourne, where they demonstrated their ability to be a respectable Wallaby side.

Is that the current state of Australia? Or was there a performance spike as a result of indolence? This weekend and the rest of their international season will provide us with much more information about them.

The Lions players gathered in the middle of the pitch to reflect on their accomplishments in the MCG a few hours after full time on Saturday.

Sitting there would have been the best thing for those players, and I would like to think that they would have discussed ways to elevate themselves to Lions status, something that hasn’t been possible in a century.

The Lions last won all of their Test matches in Argentina in 1927. That is almost a century of history. They are positioning themselves to be remembered for a long time.

It brings up memories of the European Ryder Cup team’s victory in Italy in 2023, when all 12 of the winners’ representatives were holding a press conference shortly after the trophy was reclaimed.

Yes, winning at home was wonderful, but there have been many other successes. So it was telling Rory McIlroy that Bethpage, New York, would soon be the site of their lasting legacy in later life.

In South Africa in 1997, the Lions’ final team went 2-0 up in a series.

After winning in Durban, we traveled to higher altitude with a lot of injuries and the celebrations were so ridiculous. It was a little blur for me. After the series was sealed, there was a lot of mayhem and euphoria. In retrospect, it was total chaos.

We were being pulled everywhere because our family and friends had left, and the fittest England players were organizing to travel to Australia after the third Test, so while we were focused on the final Test at Ellis Park and it was great to be chosen again in a Lions shirt, I don’t know if we really believed a 3-0 win was possible.

There was no way South Africa would let us whitewash them in their own backyard, despite the fact that we were saying we could do it and that we had the conviction at the time. Their intensity was incredible, and they were competing for Springbok rugby pride.

In the wake of winning in Durban, we never discussed winning by a 3-0. However, we are certain that these Lions players are thinking about it because they have discussed it both in private and public.

In 1997, we never would have heard the words Henry Pollock, who was supported by his captain Maro Itoje, have said.

We were just considering ways to put an end to the Springboks. However, they have been able to achieve lofty goals because of the nature of this current squad, their skill, and their Australian counterpart.

Hugo Keenan’s decisive try was the subject of a lot of discussion here in Australia, with Jac Morgan’s decision not to penalize him for a clearout just before the decisive try.

Although I didn’t believe it to be a penalty, I have seen instances where one has been imposed. I was taken aback when the referee didn’t award Australia a penalty from the MCG stands.

The Lions would be better off punishing them because they are the series’ final opponent once they face Australia. I can see why Australians are spewing, and it was a brave decision.

The winning team, however, was the right one. They did, in my opinion. In the first half, the Australians played some excellent rugby, but their defense occasionally was awful.

Australian defensive errors, such as system errors or losing the physical battle close to the line, contributed to three Lions tries, perhaps even four. However, that was caused by fatigue. The Lions’ bench was stronger, and it told.

Given how close some of the selection calls have come, I would like to speculate that Andy Farrell might make a few changes to his starting XV in 1997.

Picking a completely different team won’t work, but some bench players might start to give it some new life. Given the contributions Tom Curry has made, for instance, I’d like to see Blair Kinghorn start and Ben Earl start in the 23.

Farrell will have to weigh making sure players aren’t injured after this Test series in terms of continuity of selection.

Maybe the Lions’ internal discussion about winning 3-0 stems from the management telling the entire squad that they are ready to play until the end, not the beginning.