So, we're agreed then. Prior to 2000 it was just Great Britain, but now it's Great Britain and Ireland and therefore it's essential to reflect the fact that it's now a team representing two 'nations'.

Personally, I would leave the red and blue V's on the shirt, but I'd also add two more in green and orange, as per the colours on the Irish tricolour flag. Alternatively I'd make the shorts green and the socks orange. I'd either drop GSTQ completely, or I'd have the players sing both GSTQ and then the Irish national anthem.

Loved the Ashes series between Aus and Gt Britain. Was weaned on them as a kid when they were played every 2 years post WW2. Saw my first match in 1948. Was also at the the Hull v Aus game in the same year. Attended all 3 games when we last won the Ashes in England(1959/60) and all 3 games when we last won in Aus.(1970) Believe they switched to playing every 4 years from the 70's.

Experiment to play the first match of the 1963/64 Ashes series at Wembley was a dismal failure attracting a crowd of around 14,000 and was never repeated. The Aus. team was star studded- Gasnier, Langlands, Raper, to name a few and hammered us (Gasnier 3 tries). Was working in London at the time.

I’m sure there is a desire to show representation for Ireland. Are there any Irishmen who are good enough to be in the squad? McIlorum maybe but not any proper Irishmen.

The desire is there but the practicalities are not. And the same goes for Scotland and Wales.

The RFU are in a stronger and easier position. They will always be able to find at least one Scot, Welshman and Irishman to fit into a squad who are good enough. We don’t have that luxury. However even then the RFU faced severe criticism from Scots when they didn’t play any in a recent Lions series. Yet the team was still called the British and Irish Lions and still represented all of Great Britain and Ireland including Scotland.

I get were not going to get much buy in from Irish people if there’s no Irish in the squad but that doesn’t mean we still can’t call the team British and Irish Lions. They are the best players from that region.

According to that logic we could expand the concept further call it the British, Irish and European Lions, without any Irish or European representation.

On the other hand we could legitimately select Theodore Fages , Antoine Gigot, Julien Bousquet, and Remi Casty as representatives of France, and James Keinhorst as representative of Germany, and it would be a true northern Hemisphere team called the British and European Lions.

You could but it sounds daft.

I get your point and it's a good reply. I was more talking about the issue of jersey and anthem. Just don't think the RFL should call the team British & Irish Lions if they dont bother representing the Irish nation on the jersey and choose to stick with an anthem praising the British Queen.

That's not a genuine effort to make the brand British and Irish inclusive.

If you're looking for a reaction you'll get a more detailed one when I'm not confined to mobile....... But in terms of the motherland, the Irish had a written language before the brittons and your main source of culture arrived with a French knight in 1066......your religion stems from a syphilitic king unable to get it up and your modern politic is blame Johnny foreigner...... At one stage you owned 2/3rds of the worlds surface....... Now you're beholding to Luxembourg...... Tell Me more about the motherland.....

I suppose that what they're hoping is that in future years (2024 and beyond) that there will be some Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish, and Southern Irish players who will be good enough to make the team and squad on merit. Good luck with that, because I think RL would need to be producing a lot of talent in those nations in order for some to get through for GB and Irish Lions. I'd imagine any great Welsh or Scottish RL players would be targeted by RU and offered big money to switch codes - much like RL did the other way round with the likes of Johnathan Davies back in the 80's and 90's. I get that it's not quite the same because RL isn't amateur so it can at least try and offer something to persuade players to remain, but RU has got a lot of financial muscle nowadays and can offer the opportunity to play maybe 10 international a year in front of packed crowds in big stadiums.

Personally I think it's a flawed concept anyway. I mean, even if say a brilliant Welsh player came along, what you would be doing is putting them in the Lions for one tour, and then sticking them back in with a load of inferior players in the Wales team for the next three years.

if they are playing 6 games at test level (3 v aussies, plus nz, tonga and png) then i think something would have to be midweek or you are looking at a 7 week tour (given a week to warm up plus the games). i know tours used to be this length but in the modern game i think they'll look at 4 to 5 weeks max. they could well take a large squad with a top line 17, plus a sort of development team to play the midweek games - they could well play tonga in nz on a weds, for example, then the nz national team at the weekend. there might be a chance of a type of select team to play them as a first warm up in midweek as well

In context...

What are "brittons?" Are they similar to buttons?

Further on in the text, I need to inform you that the correct English is "beholden."

Try to brush up on your English spelling before you post, will you?