Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Ireland beat England - I've just heard the news - brilliant.


I fully expect history to repeat itself on Saturday...rugby that is.


As for this question - I have scanned the net (against the rules) and have still not been able to find the answer.

I set the original post thinking this would be about questions to which there was a real possibility that people would know the answer quickly (hence my simple questions thus far) without recourse to the net... but they are all so damn difficult, I do question whether the people asking the questions really knew the answer from their own knowledge. Its all too tough for me.


This is not aimed at DPF - just a thought I had, maybe my sporting knowledge is just not up to it.

No she doesn't, which is ironic given the nationality of the bloke who is the answer to her question.


It wasn't changed to The British and Irish Lions until 2001, thats where the "eh" came from.


The British Lions one isn't so difficult, Declan should know, he captained Ireland to their only Grand Slam.

Where did you get that one from that the name changed in 2001? If anything historically they were called simply The Lions or The British Isles. Given that Ireland has provided more captains than any other country perhaps they should be called the Irish Lions plus a few! The player was Karl Mullen.

From Wikipedia


"The team historically used the name British Isles before the use of the term "British" became increasingly controversial. On their 1950 tour of New Zealand and Australia they also adopted the nickname British Lions after the lion emblem on their jerseys. Since the 2001 tour of Australia they have used the name British and Irish Lions."

matthew123 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> From Wikipedia

>

> "The team historically used the name British Isles

> before the use of the term "British" became

> increasingly controversial. On their 1950 tour of

> New Zealand and Australia they also adopted the

> nickname British Lions after the lion emblem on

> their jerseys. Since the 2001 tour of Australia

> they have used the name British and Irish Lions."

Have to disagree with this. Who were the 'they' who adopted the name 'British Lions'? Usually the British press. Some still do it. As for there being a change in 2001, where did that come from? Never heard an official declaration of a new name for the Lions. Perhaps the press become somewhat more PC than they were previously. I think it's simpler just to call them the Lions though why such an animal not native to our shores should get this honour beats me. Any suggestions as to what they should have been called?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • CPR Dave, attendance records are available on Southwark's website. Maggie Browning has attended 100% of meetings. Jon Hartley has attended 65%.
    • I do hope NOT, wouldn't trust Farage as far as I could throw him, Starmer & co.  He's backed by GB News which focus's predominantly on immigration while the BBC focus predominantly on the Israel - Gazza conflict.   
    • Everyone gets the point that Corbynites try to make with the "total number of votes cast" statistic, it's just a specious one.  In 2017, Corbyn's Labour got fewer votes than May's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes). In 2019, Corbyn's Labour fewer votes than Johnson's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes); and he managed to drop 2.7 million votes or 6.9% of vote share between the two elections. I repeat, he got trounced by Boris F***ing Johnson and the Tories after the Brexit omnishambles. It is not true that a "fairer" electoral system would have seen Labour beat the Tories: Labour simply got fewer votes than the Tories. Corbyn lost twice. There is no metric by which he won the general election. His failure to win was a disaster for the UK, and let Johnson and Truss and Sunak into office. Corbynites have to let go of this delusion that Corbyn but really won somehow if you squint in a certain way. It is completely irrelevant that Labour under Corbyn got more votes than Labour under Starmer. It is like saying Hull City was more successful in its 2014 FA Cup Final than Chelsea was in its 2018 FA Cup Final, because Hull scored 2 goals when Chelsea only scored 1. But guess what - Chelsea won its game and Hull City lost. Corbyn's fans turned out to vote for him - but an even larger group of people who found him repellant were motivated enough to show up and vote Tory.
    • I guess its the thing these days to demonstrate an attitude, in this instance seemingly of the negative kind, instead of taking pride in your work and have standards then 🤷‍♀️
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...