Advertisement
Any organisation, be it a multi-national corporation or a twitter page, needs a purpose. A north star that it can follow in the dark and guide its decision making. A reason for being, a core competency, a mission. So then, what is the purpose of the British & Irish Lions? This is not a flippant remark but a genuine question. In this article we’ll explore the possibilities and ask if the historic team is staying true to any of them.
Most organisations have a ‘mission’ or ‘vision’ page on their website. The Lions does not have something listed so explicitly, but after a short search we find the following on the ‘about us’ page:
‘It is on Tour that history, determination and grit blend with skill, determination and fierce passion. Above all there is friendship, between players, between fans.’
It goes on to say:
‘A Lions Tour is a unique blend of what makes rugby special, a celebration of sport and the power it has to unite people from different backgrounds and cultures.’
The page is hard to read because it contains multiple grammatical errors and run-on sentences. However, we can deduce that the Lions are very determined – mentioning determination twice in the first sentence. The word ‘blend’ is also used twice. This tells us that the Lions Tour is multifaceted – a combination of many things such as history, uniting people from different backgrounds and being ‘the best of the best’. So, let’s take each of these in turn and examine them.
No one is debating the concept that the Lions is made up of the best players of the four constituent nations. We might dispute who the best players are but we agree that the selection criteria is clearly ‘you must be the best’. However, do Lions Tours prove who is the best?
The tours to New Zealand and South Africa can certainly claim to. Any team who wins a test series in the two countries who have dominated the Rugby World Cup can legitimately say they are the best in the world. Unfortunately, the Lions haven’t won a test series in either country since 1997 – almost three decades.
This year’s tour to Australia, however, will not prove who the best team is. When the Lions toured Australia in 2013 they were taking on the reigning Tri-Nations champion (technically, they still are). Now though, Australia are ranked below three of the four constituent nations and finished bottom of last year’s Rugby Championship. Ireland, Scotland and England would all expect to beat Australia without needing the help of the other nations.
The highest ranked team the Lions play on this tour is actually Argentina, placed 5th in World Rugby’s table - and they lost. Playing Super Rugby teams midweek certainly doesn’t prove the quality of a test level team. If the Lions were to cement themselves as the best team in rugby, would they not be better touring the top five ranked nations outside of Britain and Ireland? That way, if they won those games, there would be no question over their elite status.
The Lions are a union of unions. Four nations coming together to form one team, once every four years. But is it really fair to say the Lions is about uniting ‘different’ cultures when they have been unerringly touring the same nations on a 12-year rotation since 1989? In fact, a one-off game against France in Paris aside, the Lions have not played away against a nation other than South Africa, Australia or New Zealand since 1977 (a single game in Fiji).
Surely a team that is about uniting cultures and backgrounds would be looking to actively diversify its opposition? At the very least it should be taking the tours to new places such as USA or Spain. Even Japan, whom the Lions hosted at Murrayfield in 2021, are yet to host the Lions.
Simply put, a once-every-four-years tour, to one of three nations that have hosted at least some of every single tour since 1936, can in no way claim to be driven by multiculturalism. Taking the Lions to new places against new opposition is the only way it could be justified on such grounds.
Certainly, the Lions refer to history heavily in their marketing. Clips of past tours and interviews with former tourists are plentiful. The Lions are seen by many as a reprisal – a throwback to the amateur era. The two-games-per-week format is something modern rugby has long since dispensed with (although they look set for a comeback on the South Africa vs New Zealand tours starting 2026).
But is the Lions purely a throwback? Is it really a nostalgia trip? Other than sticking rigidly to their three traditional opponents and playing midweek games against club sides (most of whom did not exist pre- 90s professionalisation), what do the Lions do that’s nostalgic? They don’t even play in retro kits, which would surely sell like hot cakes if they did.
The Barbarians are arguably much closer to a retro rugby team than the Lions, if for no other reason than their reputation for heavy drinking. The Barbarians are an example of a team with a clear purpose: to play entertaining rugby. The Lions mention ‘entertainment’ nowhere on their website. The fact that X-factor players such as Blair Murray & Dracy Graham have been left at home tells us that’s no accident.
So, we have shown that the Lions is not about proving themselves as the best team in the world, is not a throwback to the amateur days, and is certainly not about multiculturalism. Some may argue that incorporating aspects of all of these is what makes it special. If that were true, however, then the Lions is compromised; it is holding itself back.
Perhaps, though, we are viewing the Lions in the wrong way. More specifically, perhaps we are looking at it upside down. By hosting a Lions Tour, a nation is getting over half a dozen sold-out rugby matches in its biggest stadiums, it is getting tens of thousands of tourists coming down to spend their money in airports, bars, restaurants and hotels, and it is guaranteeing its rugby team is front-page news across every sporting outlet, not only at home but back in the UK & Ireland too.
Only on this tour will the Lions players be getting a share of the profit for the first time. The Telegraph reported that the total profit expected for the Lions is £10M. The Sydney Morning Herald, on the other hand, reported that Rugby Australia is expecting to register nearly £50M profit from the tour, with the overall Australian economy hoping for a £95M injection.
It seems, then, that before we agree ‘what’ the Lions is for, we should first agree ‘who’ it is for. Based on this evidence, rugby’s most famous tour is not for the benefit of the tourists.
