RugbyRebels

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote: When? I mean he's already scoring tries at a faster rate than Joe Rokocoko or any other AB player of all time. He scores at a rate of just under a try a game. He's not a Lomu with a massive size advantage over his contemporaries yet he ekes out a considerable physical advantage. If being a winger is in large part about finishing his stats show him to be the best finisher the world has yet seen. He could finish his career tomorrow and easily have a call on being in the top 3 wngers of all time.

He does have the mild advantage of being 6'4" and well over 100kgs, which helps slightly. However there is no denying his scoring rate. As with everything he also plays in the team that is by far and away the best in the world, which will naturally afford greater opportunity to score.

Has there been a better team than the one he's playing in? Was Roko's All Blacks comparable? What about Campo's Aus, or Underwoods England? Habana? Lomu? And then of course the proper old geezers of middle earth or some time long forgotten.

The size is handy but not as stark a difference between him and other players of his era as Lomu, or even Kirwan. Besides even if his size were freakish - which I don't think it is - is it any different from someone having other freakish physical gifts such as speed?

Comparing across eras and teams is always difficult, not least because you'd have to remove the player you're discussing from the team in order to assess how much of an advantage the strength of the team they are in would give them. This ABs side is the most dominant in history, but you cannot divorce that from how superb Savea is within that team. Suffice to say his record is superb in a career of just over 40 Tests and as yet shows no sign of dropping off. He's certainly earned a place in the discussion as greatest of all time.

Ahem: http://rugbyrebels.co/board/viewtopic.p ... 2786#p2764

Savea has scored 38 tries in 41 tests (39 starts). Rokocoko is the only All Black anywhere near that, getting to 38 in 42 tests (40 starts). Roks only scored 8 tries in his last 26 tests after that though.

Lizard wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:
He does have the mild advantage of being 6'4" and well over 100kgs, which helps slightly. However there is no denying his scoring rate. As with everything he also plays in the team that is by far and away the best in the world, which will naturally afford greater opportunity to score.

Has there been a better team than the one he's playing in? Was Roko's All Blacks comparable? What about Campo's Aus, or Underwoods England? Habana? Lomu? And then of course the proper old geezers of middle earth or some time long forgotten.

The size is handy but not as stark a difference between him and other players of his era as Lomu, or even Kirwan. Besides even if his size were freakish - which I don't think it is - is it any different from someone having other freakish physical gifts such as speed?

Comparing across eras and teams is always difficult, not least because you'd have to remove the player you're discussing from the team in order to assess how much of an advantage the strength of the team they are in would give them. This ABs side is the most dominant in history, but you cannot divorce that from how superb Savea is within that team. Suffice to say his record is superb in a career of just over 40 Tests and as yet shows no sign of dropping off. He's certainly earned a place in the discussion as greatest of all time.

Ahem: http://rugbyrebels.co/board/viewtopic.p ... 2786#p2764

Savea has scored 38 tries in 41 tests (39 starts). Rokocoko is the only All Black anywhere near that, getting to 38 in 42 tests (40 starts). Roks only scored 8 tries in his last 26 tests after that though.

You can make numbers tell any story.......a fairly convincing one in this case.
Domestic front needs work.

kk67 wrote:

You can make numbers tell any story.......a fairly convincing one in this case.
Domestic front needs work.

World record try scorer Daisuke Ohata scored his 38th try in his 34th test (31st start). The (lack of) strength of many of his opponents has been discussed on the old board.

No one else has scored 38 tries in fewer tests than Savea.

Savea is one of the very best ever. Is he THE best? Too early to say as he's still playing, very impressively too. He's got a lot of games left in him.

Talk about off subject btw!

I think messi is better than carlton palmer.

padprop wrote:

Peej wrote:It must have been pretty terrible seeing as Savea beat up his girlfriend (despite having been used in an anti-domestic violence poster campaign called It's Not OK) but only had to issue a public apology to be kept in the promised land of the All Black fold. Something that resulted in international exile must have been far worse.

Firstly, he hardly did a Chris Brown job on her, which is still in no way okay but GBH and assault can range quite widely

And secondly, he is the best winger in the world, possibly of all time, and will therefore be given a large amount of lee-way.

Well he wasn't the best winger in the world in April 2013 when this happened, so that argument doesn't really stack up.

Assault is assault, and he committed it on his partner and the mother of his child. Legality aside, it's a massive character failing but apparently not a big enough one to violate the "No Dicks" policy of the All Blacks. Go figure.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote: When? I mean he's already scoring tries at a faster rate than Joe Rokocoko or any other AB player of all time. He scores at a rate of just under a try a game. He's not a Lomu with a massive size advantage over his contemporaries yet he ekes out a considerable physical advantage. If being a winger is in large part about finishing his stats show him to be the best finisher the world has yet seen. He could finish his career tomorrow and easily have a call on being in the top 3 wngers of all time.

He does have the mild advantage of being 6'4" and well over 100kgs, which helps slightly. However there is no denying his scoring rate. As with everything he also plays in the team that is by far and away the best in the world, which will naturally afford greater opportunity to score.

Has there been a better team than the one he's playing in? Was Roko's All Blacks comparable? What about Campo's Aus, or Underwoods England? Habana? Lomu? And then of course the proper old geezers of middle earth or some time long forgotten.

The size is handy but not as stark a difference between him and other players of his era as Lomu, or even Kirwan. Besides even if his size were freakish - which I don't think it is - is it any different from someone having other freakish physical gifts such as speed?

Comparing across eras and teams is always difficult, not least because you'd have to remove the player you're discussing from the team in order to assess how much of an advantage the strength of the team they are in would give them. This ABs side is the most dominant in history, but you cannot divorce that from how superb Savea is within that team. Suffice to say his record is superb in a career of just over 40 Tests and as yet shows no sign of dropping off. He's certainly earned a place in the discussion as greatest of all time.

So you are a Savea fan, we get it. He has a great scoring record in a great team that scores a lot of tries. However, I'd still say greatest of all time is a stretch, based on a 3 year test career, given his dips in form and his less than awesome all round game, just at this moment. If that's ok.

anyway...and here's the trump card....'Julian'..ffs

padprop wrote: And secondly, he is the best winger in the world, possibly of all time, and will therefore be given a large amount of lee-way.

Yup - as long as you're extremely talented it's perfectly OK to beat your wife, and as long as you only punch her a few times that's OK...

Nice

TheNomad wrote:

padprop wrote: And secondly, he is the best winger in the world, possibly of all time, and will therefore be given a large amount of lee-way.

Yup - as long as you're extremely talented it's perfectly OK to beat your wife, and as long as you only punch her a few times that's OK...

Nice

Sure good ahead and cherry pick quotations that are completely out of context. I was referring to his cause in comparison to that of Hughes, and It is common knowledge that in this world the rich and talented get away with things that us average joes simply do not. See Tyson Fury, Benzema, Mayweather, Michael Vick and even OJ Simpson initially.

And the fact that the case didn't go to court as she withdrew the charge leads us to the assumption that he wasn't knocking her around like a ragdoll, with also numberous sources close to Savea saying he pushed her after an argument, which I in NO WAY CONDONE, but I for one would like to give him the benefit of the doubt in this one and believe what he said that it was just an argument that escalated to a shove, which is obviously not okay, but a lot more forgiveable than landing a couple haymakers.

To be fair though, to have even had dips in form and have almost a try a game is ridiculous.

Imagine if he was consistent.

Mikey Brown wrote:To be fair though, to have even had dips in form and have almost a try a game is ridiculous.

Imagine if he was consistent.

The dips in form are when he doesn't score twice...

He does have a ridiculous record. I think the best assessment one could manage would be to measure him against the person on the other wing to have some idea how much of the effect is him and how much is the ABs, but that needs someone like Lizard to crumch the numbers. Personally he's not my favourite person to watch (that's currently NMS) and I'm not saying that he is the best winger of all time or that it's a fruitful exercise to determine who is. Just that if you were to bother, then it's not really too early to start considering that it might be him.

Just think how good he will be when he is no longer fat.

The ABs select wingers that are (generally) in form at the time and that fit in to the plan. Corey Jane, Bin Smuff (when put there) are examples of this Phil-Ofosy. Savea has enjoyed some luxury in this regard, as he went cold for a while, but he seems to do the damage when really needed (hello France). Depth helps changing in response to need. The key thing is that a winger should not be viewed as an isolated ninja messiah, but as a complement to a team. Like Ricky Flutey.

So how does admin/mods work on here then? Sarries - Wasps = Julian Savea - Awesome or not?

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:To be fair though, to have even had dips in form and have almost a try a game is ridiculous.

Imagine if he was consistent.

The dips in form are when he doesn't score twice...

He does have a ridiculous record. I think the best assessment one could manage would be to measure him against the person on the other wing to have some idea how much of the effect is him and how much is the ABs, but that needs someone like Lizard to crumch the numbers. Personally he's not my favourite person to watch (that's currently NMS) and I'm not saying that he is the best winger of all time or that it's a fruitful exercise to determine who is. Just that if you were to bother, then it's not really too early to start considering that it might be him.

Pretty easy one on Statsguru this.

Most ways of looking at it he's very good.

NZ have scored 164 tries in the games in which Savea has played, I think 2 penalty tries and the rest with designated scorers.

He's scored 38 of those for a proportion of 23.2% (which has given me an idea for statistic of the day).

In terms of distribution 4 hat tricks, 8 braces, 10 singles and 19 scoreless games.

Only other players in double figures for the same set of matches are: Ben Smith (14 in 37), Kieran Read (11 in 38) and Aaron Smith (11 in 37).

http://stats.espnscrum.com/statsguru/ru ... ype=player

Filtering for other players on the wing in the same games as Savea some small sample sizes but impressive strike rates at the top: Ben Smith (11 in 16), Corey Jane (7 in 13) and NMS (6 in 7). Everyone else combined 6 in 27.

Totals: Savea 38 in 41 vs Other winger 30 in 63.

http://stats.espnscrum.com/statsguru/ru ... ype=player

And for comparison, games since 2012 where Savea didn't feature, wingers with more than one try:

Piutau (4 in 5), Ben Smith (3 in 4) and NMS (2 in 1).

http://stats.espnscrum.com/statsguru/ru ... ype=player

Don't think this demonstrates anything beyond additional support for the notion that he's a bloody good winger but there it is.

TheNomad wrote:

padprop wrote: And secondly, he is the best winger in the world, possibly of all time, and will therefore be given a large amount of lee-way.

Yup - as long as you're extremely talented it's perfectly OK to beat your wife, and as long as you only punch her a few times that's OK...

Nice

If I was to try and remove bias from my thinking he'd be right up there with the best NZ wingers I've seen, probably a bit behind Sivivatu, but ahead of those such as Wilson, Lomu, Tana, Rokocoko, Howlett. But for those known to be wife beaters I make no attempt to remove bias, and instead wonder how people are happy to pull on the same shirt.

Beasties wrote:So how does admin/mods work on here then? Sarries - Wasps = Julian Savea - Awesome or not?

It's a long and established board tradition for threads to meander (or devolve back into one of the inevitable topics of the board - Leicester's academy, Armitage, England's back row). I've got no particular animus against letting the conversation wend its own way.

Puja

Digby wrote:

TheNomad wrote:

padprop wrote: And secondly, he is the best winger in the world, possibly of all time, and will therefore be given a large amount of lee-way.

Yup - as long as you're extremely talented it's perfectly OK to beat your wife, and as long as you only punch her a few times that's OK...

Nice

If I was to try and remove bias from my thinking he'd be right up there with the best NZ wingers I've seen, probably a bit behind Sivivatu, but ahead of those such as Wilson, Lomu, Tana, Rokocoko, Howlett. But for those known to be wife beaters I make no attempt to remove bias, and instead wonder how people are happy to pull on the same shirt.

No one has any idea about the case other than Savea, his wife and the lawyers involved. At this rate we might as well start calling Topsy Ojo and David Strettle sexual assaulter's after the new zealand tour during Johnson's reign. Its wrong to comment on things we have no knowledge of.

Well, we do know that he was charged. He was contrite about the situation of which he was "not proud". The charge was then withdrawn under the "Police Diversion" scheme on the basis he undertake some form of counselling. So the complaint was plainly not false, but either the alleged actions were minor such as to not warrant a charge, or he had a good defence such as self defence.

If you really care, there will be published police procedures/policies around charging and prosecution to allow a finer assessment of the likely degree of violence, but I'm fairly certain that if anyone has been hurt the charge is as least "assault with intent..." or "assault causing..." and not just assault which is then dropped. Certainly he would not have got Police Diversion if his actions were considered violent or involved family violence. The media reports also said that the victim did not require medical treatment.

If you want to label someone who was probably involved a bit of push and shove during argument, and has never been convicted, a "wife beater" then that is your call. But it's probably an inaccurate representation.

Of course it's not to be condoned or swept under the carpet but it is possible to be fair about it.

Lizard wrote: Of course it's not to be condoned or swept under the carpet but it is possible to be fair about it.

It should have been possible to be fair about it, and it should have been possible for him to come back into the game and redeem himself. But as he was rested for one club game he never for me got a fair punishment, and in the absence of a suitable punishment I'm stuck at thinking of him as scum. I did try to think of a nicer way to phrase that than scum, but it is how I think of him

Puja wrote:

APR wrote:Ah - the joys and romance of the handsome carriage and steam trains, the economic benefits of indentured servitude and slavery, the political clout of a gunboat policy.........................

Oh - sorry Puja, just got carried away with your dreaming of things long-gone

If a player is qualified for England under the current rules, he should be available for selection. Its really quite simple.

Rules are not infallible and got straight from the brow of Zeus. Sometimes they're wrong and need to be changed. In terms of IRB rules, we should expect that some time around 2020.

Let's take your point ad absurdum though - would we not be well served, as the richest rugby nation, to go around and buy up as much young uncapped Kiwi talent as we could? Imagine what we could do if we had Akira Ioane in 3 years time! After all, it's allowable under the current rules and who really cares if the English representative team doesn't contain anyone with a link to England?

Puja

Oh - yes, the Rules MIGHT change in the future - true dat. Presumably you'll then want rugby to turn amateur, tours to the SH to travel by boat, stud-rucking to be re-introduced, drug-testing to be removed, ditto concussion rules. Maybe return to it's roots - more Eton wall-game. Or maybe 11 players per side playing with a round ball - a la William Webb-Ellis? I can play reductio ad absurdum too!

Back In the real world, we play by existing rules. And those allow certain players to be eligible, so they should be available for selection. Simples.....

Puja wrote:
It's a long and established board tradition for threads to meander (or devolve back into one of the inevitable topics of the board - Leicester's academy, Armitage, England's back row). I've got no particular animus against letting the conversation wend its own way.

Puja

Hurr hurr
He said "animus"

APR wrote:

Puja wrote:

APR wrote:Ah - the joys and romance of the handsome carriage and steam trains, the economic benefits of indentured servitude and slavery, the political clout of a gunboat policy.........................

Oh - sorry Puja, just got carried away with your dreaming of things long-gone

If a player is qualified for England under the current rules, he should be available for selection. Its really quite simple.

Rules are not infallible and got straight from the brow of Zeus. Sometimes they're wrong and need to be changed. In terms of IRB rules, we should expect that some time around 2020.

Let's take your point ad absurdum though - would we not be well served, as the richest rugby nation, to go around and buy up as much young uncapped Kiwi talent as we could? Imagine what we could do if we had Akira Ioane in 3 years time! After all, it's allowable under the current rules and who really cares if the English representative team doesn't contain anyone with a link to England?

Puja

Oh - yes, the Rules MIGHT change in the future - true dat. Presumably you'll then want rugby to turn amateur, tours to the SH to travel by boat, stud-rucking to be re-introduced, drug-testing to be removed, ditto concussion rules. Maybe return to it's roots - more Eton wall-game. Or maybe 11 players per side playing with a round ball - a la William Webb-Ellis? I can play reductio ad absurdum too!

Back In the real world, we play by existing rules. And those allow certain players to be eligible, so they should be available for selection. Simples.....

World Rugby are looking at the eligibility rules, though. Albeit at their usual glacial pace. So, it's obviously deemed an issue.

As you say, the rules are in place and we play by them. However, there is no rule stating you can't not pick a player solely ecause you dislike how he has qualified. Jones may want players who want to play for Eng for more than just money and the opportunity to play test rugby. Similarly, a lot of Unions, including the RFU once Jones' contract expires, will only pick indigenous coaches. Nothing in the rules against appointing a foreign coach though......

APR wrote: Oh - yes, the Rules MIGHT change in the future - true dat. Presumably you'll then want rugby to turn amateur, tours to the SH to travel by boat, stud-rucking to be re-introduced, drug-testing to be removed, ditto concussion rules. Maybe return to it's roots - more Eton wall-game. Or maybe 11 players per side playing with a round ball - a la William Webb-Ellis? I can play reductio ad absurdum too!

Back In the real world, we play by existing rules. And those allow certain players to be eligible, so they should be available for selection. Simples.....

And the existing rules allow for my example (which is arguably currently practised by Ireland). Whereas yours appears to be completely ungrounded in any kind of reality and seem more than a little bit weird. Are you you feeling all right Andy?

Puja

Puja wrote:

APR wrote: Oh - yes, the Rules MIGHT change in the future - true dat. Presumably you'll then want rugby to turn amateur, tours to the SH to travel by boat, stud-rucking to be re-introduced, drug-testing to be removed, ditto concussion rules. Maybe return to it's roots - more Eton wall-game. Or maybe 11 players per side playing with a round ball - a la William Webb-Ellis? I can play reductio ad absurdum too!

Back In the real world, we play by existing rules. And those allow certain players to be eligible, so they should be available for selection. Simples.....

And the existing rules allow for my example (which is arguably currently practised by Ireland). Whereas yours appears to be completely ungrounded in any kind of reality and seem more than a little bit weird. Are you you feeling all right Andy?

Puja

yes yes yes Puja, that's all well and good. But answer the question. Would you like the more Eton wall-game?.............. would you?