WHEN THE Lions squad to tour South Africa was announced in April, there was a debate about the merit of some of the selections and the omission of a few others. It was the kind of discussion that so often follows the selection of an international team.

The Lions manager, Fran Cotton, stated at the time the squad gathered that the management trio of himself, coach Ian McGeechan and assistant coach Jim Telfer were satisfied that they had selected the right players within the scope of availability. Ireland wing Simon Geoghegan had been an original choice, but was ruled out by a foot injury two days before the team was announced.

Then on the first day of assembly in Weybridge in the middle of May, another Ireland player, tight head prop Peter Clohessy, failed to come through training and had to withdraw. His place went to yet another Ireland player, Paul Wallace. Wallace had been one of the unlucky players who did not gain initial selection. Subsequent events were to prove he would have been a very worthy choice.

It is true to say that not many rated the Lions chances of winning the Test series. Indeed, there those who did not think the Lions would win a single Test and would probably lose three, or maybe four of their provincial matches.

The players and management held a meeting before they departed for South Africa and the positive nature of that meeting and the views expressed at it were to find substance in subsequent events. They were going to meet the World Champions on their own soil, but the Lions believed they could win the Test series.

Most teams, it is true, will always express optimism before a match, but there was in the squad a confidence accompanied by the necessary level of steel and resolve.

"We knew the type of game we wanted to play and had the players to play it," said coach Ian McGeechan. He now has a truly remarkable and unique record in the history of Lions rugby. As a player, he was a member of the 1974 Lions team that won the Test series in South Africa. He has now completed the double as coach. McGeechan also coached the Lions to Test series victory in Australia in 1989 and was extremely unlucky that the Lions team he coached in New Zealand lost the test series 2-1 on one of the worst decisions I have ever seen in international rugby.

McGeechan and Telfer adopted a playing philosophy and a selection policy to implement it. "We had a very special group of players," said McGeechan.

"Some of the young players on the squad have improved incredibly in seven weeks. The nature of Lions squads and teams is such that once the tour is over, then they disband. It is not like a national side. There is no continuity. But having said that, it is important that all four home countries now benefit from what has been achieved and from the presence in their teams of players who did so well in South Africa."

The words most often used about the 1997 Lions by South African players and officials are 'surprise' and 'underestimated'. That the Lions surprised South Africans is beyond question. That the South Africans underestimated the team and the squad is equally so.

Like most touring teams, the Lions started the tour unimpressively. It takes time for combinations to blend, for team work to build and for players to get accustomed to each other and to an awareness of some of their colleagues' strengths. Here again, the Lions are unique among touring teams as the players are drawn from four different nations. That imposes its own problems.

"That is something you must live with," said Telfer, who did a superb job with the forwards and whose reputation with the players could scarcely be higher.

The Lions opened the tour against Eastern Province and won that match 39- 11. They were singularly unimpressive in defeating Border 18-14 and although they won 38-21 against Western Province, flaws were exposed and the scrummaging was not good.

"I always felt we would rectify that once the players settled in and we got our combinations right," said Telfer. He was proved correct.

The Lions played very well in defeating Mpumalanga 64-14 in the fourth match of the tour and played some exhilarating rugby. But the cost was high as second row Doddie Weir, rated a key man in the line out, sustained a serious knee injury inflicted by a deliberate kick by an opponent.

Doubts about the Lions true worth seemed to be valid when they lost to Northern Transvaal 35-30 and again, the scrummaging was not good, nor was the defensive play. Yet those two areas were to prove crucial in winning the Test series. That match, the first of three in succession against Super 12 teams, two of them on the high veldt, gave added currency to the belief in South Africa that the Springboks would take the Lions in the series and do so comfortably.

Four days after losing to Northern Transvaal, the Lions met Gauteng (Transvaal) at Ellis Park and I believe that the 20-14 win attained in that encounter and the way the Lions played were crucial elements in sustaining the Lions' belief that they had the capacity to win the series. Confidence was regained, the management was getting the combinations right.

Four days after the win over Gauteng, the Lions played superbly to defeat Natal, the Currie Cup holders and top South African team in the Super 12, by 42-12. Suddenly, there was an awareness that South Africa might have a real fight on their hands.

The Lions travelled to Wellington on the following Tuesday and beat the Emerging Springboks 54-22. The first Test in Cape Town was at hand.

The Lions selectors opted for the two most inexperienced props in the squad, Tom Smith and Paul Wallace, to deal with a Springboks front row that was reputedly equal to the famed All Blacks trio.

Wallace and Smith had seen off such seasoned performers and former Lions as Jason Leonard and David Young. The Lions were long-odds outsiders and were delighted that the forecasters in South Africa, among them former coaches and players, said that they would be destroyed in the scrum.

The Lions won a great match 25-16, coming from behind in doing so. A new respect for the team was born. Three days after the Test, the Lions travelled to Bloemfontein and gave what was probably the best display of the tour in defeating Free State 52-30. Cotton rated this as one of the greatest displays in Lions' history, bearing in mind the circumstances.

The Springboks, now on the back foot, made changes for the second Test in Durban. They had most of the play in that match, but missed penalty chances and the Lions, whose defence was magnificent, won the match with a dropped goal in a powerful finish. The unattainable had been attained, the unbelievable had happened, the Lions had won the Test series.

It was only the second time this century that a Lions side had done that on South African soil, it had taken the All Blacks 100 years to do it, which they did in 1996, also winning the series 2-1.

So it was into the final week of the tour and the Lions played their last provincial match against Northern Free State in Welkom.

They won it readily, but it was a patchy performance. Then came the final Test in Ellis Park. Circumstances decreed that the Lions had to make three changes because of injuries, one more on the morning of the match because of illness, and had decided on a change on the open-side flank when the team was named.

True to their tradition, the Springboks saved the whitewash, but had the Lions been the team to take their chances on this occasion, they would not have lost by 35-16, with the Springboks scoring 12 points in the last five minutes.

The 1997 Lions had failed to whitewash the Springboks, but they had won the Test series, 2-1, and all but one of their 10 provincial matches. They had earned a new respect for Northern Hemisphere rugby.

In putting the tour into context, it must be borne in mind that even before the first Test, the Lions had lost three players from the squad through injury, Weir, out-half Paul Grayson and a player rated a key man, scrum-half Robert Howley. Centre Will Greenwood was gone before the second Test and so too was the most experienced man in the squad, Ieuan Evans.

Hooker Keith Wood, wing Alan Tait and out-half Gregor Townsend were all ruled out of the third Test. So, too, was Ireland's Eric Miller. He had been chosen for the first Test along with the three other Irish representatives in the squad, Wood, Wallace and Jeremy Davidson. Miller was hit by influenza and had to withdraw.

His replacement for the first Test, Tim Rodber, was retained for the second Test, but Miller did come on as a replacement for Rodber, thus sharing in the historic series win. However, he damaged a thigh muscle and that cost him a chance of getting into the team for the third Test. As circumstances would have it, Rodber had to withdraw on the morning of the match and so another chance for Miller had gone.

But from an Irish perspective, the four representatives all contributed enormously to the success of the tour.

Wood was an inspirational player and hooker, Wallace a revelation at tight head, Davidson superb in the second row and Miller underlined what a quality player he is at 21 years of age.

All four will have benefited greatly from the tour and hopefully Irish rugby will benefit from their presence in the national side next season.

The 1997 Lions did more than win a Test series, they proved that the perceived gap between rugby north and south of the Equator is not the gaping chasm some would have us believe.

I have reported six Lions tours over the last quarter of a century and I have no hesitation in stating that the itinerary the 1997 Lions undertook was the most difficult I have known. Nor could one have asked to deal with a better, or more co-operative management team and squad.

The nature of the itinerary the Lions had to face was a point acknowledged by Springboks captain Gary Teichmann. And I will end with the assessment of Springboks coach Carel du Plessis and their scrum-half, Joost van der Westhuizen.

"The Lions have shown what they can do. They have given a new dimension to Northern Hemisphere rugby and we would do well to take due account. They have the players and they played some great rugby. They won the Test series and that was the primary objective, as it was for us.

Van der Westhuizen said: "Let us face the fact that they surprised us all in the Test series. They deserve great credit for what they have achieved and for the manner in which they played the game. The game is about scoring and taking chances. They took theirs and they have deserved what they got."

The 1997 Lions are no more, they are an entry in the record books, but their deeds offer an inspiration, and the memories of them will stay with us as long as memory holds.