Numbers wrote:
Ok, in that case I would suggest that this wasn't a gilt-edged chance, of course his running angle allowed him to make the break in the first place but lets not let that get in the way of the JD bashing.
To give you an idea we had I think 15 clean line breaks v the Blues and scored one try, I think on Saturday it was something along the lines of 11 and we scored no tries, so scoring from the advanced position that you 'hope' we would have converted from would be wishful thinking I suspect, see the numerous times we have failed to convert from 5 yards out as an example.
No-one seems to be bashing Stander for taking his eye off the ball completely with the line begging, or Te'o's hopeless pass to Williams, ditto Watson.
If you want to critcise then try to do it with a measure of perspective.
I'll criticise them all but I'm not going to write a list of all those who've ****ed up just so I can point out that Davies ****ed up. I'm still angry with Kay for dropping the ball over the line in the 2003 World Cup final but maybe I should just be happy he had the ability to stand out there to create the opportunity in the first place.
Just because we've failed to convert so many line breaks doesn't take away from the fact that it's a try scoring opportunity. Any line break in the oppo's 22 should be considered a try scoring opportunity.
When it comes down to it it was a big mistake. We won't have many scoring opportunities in the tests and one that good should not be squandered with such a poor piece of execution.
Just to show I'm not completely one sided, I was very pleased that he didn't fire it into row F of the crowd as he normally does off his left hand.
You can continue as you are, just don't expect anyone to take you seriously if you just have an agenda.
Here's what Guscott said: "Jonathan Davies is also in such good form that he is likely to start in the Test matches and they will want to get him back as quickly as possible."
I wouldn't think you have any respect for him either,, not one pundit has criticised Davies to my knowledge and as previously stated there were bigger mistakes from other players imo which have been glossed over, but lets not let any facts disrupt the witch hunt.
No agenda. As I say, I'll criticise anyone who I think deserves criticism. I criticised Hogg and Sexton after the BaaBaas match, even though I'd have both in my starting XV if in form, and I criticised Haskell after the Blues match.
As for what Guscott says, unless you've picked the wrong the quote and he's somewhere said that Davies was correct to pass to the Crusaders player rather than hold on to the ball then I fail to see what it had to do with the fact Davies shouldn't have passed the ball to the Crusaders player.
If it's any consolation then if Gats played 10. Sexton 12. Farrell then I'd quite happily have Davies at 13 and I'd still quite happily say Davies shouldn't have passed to the Crusaders winger.
Numbers wrote:
Ok, in that case I would suggest that this wasn't a gilt-edged chance, of course his running angle allowed him to make the break in the first place but lets not let that get in the way of the JD bashing.
To give you an idea we had I think 15 clean line breaks v the Blues and scored one try, I think on Saturday it was something along the lines of 11 and we scored no tries, so scoring from the advanced position that you 'hope' we would have converted from would be wishful thinking I suspect, see the numerous times we have failed to convert from 5 yards out as an example.
No-one seems to be bashing Stander for taking his eye off the ball completely with the line begging, or Te'o's hopeless pass to Williams, ditto Watson.
If you want to critcise then try to do it with a measure of perspective.
I'll criticise them all but I'm not going to write a list of all those who've ****ed up just so I can point out that Davies ****ed up. I'm still angry with Kay for dropping the ball over the line in the 2003 World Cup final but maybe I should just be happy he had the ability to stand out there to create the opportunity in the first place.
Just because we've failed to convert so many line breaks doesn't take away from the fact that it's a try scoring opportunity. Any line break in the oppo's 22 should be considered a try scoring opportunity.
When it comes down to it it was a big mistake. We won't have many scoring opportunities in the tests and one that good should not be squandered with such a poor piece of execution.
Just to show I'm not completely one sided, I was very pleased that he didn't fire it into row F of the crowd as he normally does off his left hand.
You can continue as you are, just don't expect anyone to take you seriously if you just have an agenda.
Here's what Guscott said: "Jonathan Davies is also in such good form that he is likely to start in the Test matches and they will want to get him back as quickly as possible."
I wouldn't think you have any respect for him either,, not one pundit has criticised Davies to my knowledge and as previously stated there were bigger mistakes from other players imo which have been glossed over, but lets not let any facts disrupt the witch hunt.
Did you seriously just quote Guscott to support your point?
Mellsblue wrote:
I'll criticise them all but I'm not going to write a list of all those who've ****ed up just so I can point out that Davies ****ed up. I'm still angry with Kay for dropping the ball over the line in the 2003 World Cup final but maybe I should just be happy he had the ability to stand out there to create the opportunity in the first place.
Just because we've failed to convert so many line breaks doesn't take away from the fact that it's a try scoring opportunity. Any line break in the oppo's 22 should be considered a try scoring opportunity.
When it comes down to it it was a big mistake. We won't have many scoring opportunities in the tests and one that good should not be squandered with such a poor piece of execution.
Just to show I'm not completely one sided, I was very pleased that he didn't fire it into row F of the crowd as he normally does off his left hand.
You can continue as you are, just don't expect anyone to take you seriously if you just have an agenda.
Here's what Guscott said: "Jonathan Davies is also in such good form that he is likely to start in the Test matches and they will want to get him back as quickly as possible."
I wouldn't think you have any respect for him either,, not one pundit has criticised Davies to my knowledge and as previously stated there were bigger mistakes from other players imo which have been glossed over, but lets not let any facts disrupt the witch hunt.
Did you seriously just quote Guscott to support your point?
Puja
I suppose you know better than Guscott?
What would you base your obvious superior ability to read the game on or are you just trotting out an opinion formed by the EMB illuminati?
I thought it was a perfectly understandable piece of decision making by JDavies. With the Crusaders wing sprinting back it's probably a 50:50 pass, but if he can get the ball through to North it's a walk in. If he takes contact and the Lions recycle do the odds go above 50:50? 77 minutes later and that pass was still probably the most gilt-edged chance for a try for either team.
On Davies in general, he has some big gaps in his skill set, but he's a genuine world class defender. Only a few weeks ago he completely shut down Leinsters wide game in the Pro12 semi. So if you expect/need to be doing a lot of highly accurate defending then maybe Davies is the way to go.
And assuming there are no injuries, there's a high likelihood that it'll be 1 of Ryan Crotty or Sonny Bill Williams at 12 and probably Anton Lienert-Brown at 13 lining up against the Lions. You want someone with a bit of staunch defence to hold them up.
I'm a god
How can you kill a god?
Shame on you, sweet Nerevar
Numbers wrote:
You can continue as you are, just don't expect anyone to take you seriously if you just have an agenda.
Here's what Guscott said: "Jonathan Davies is also in such good form that he is likely to start in the Test matches and they will want to get him back as quickly as possible."
I wouldn't think you have any respect for him either,, not one pundit has criticised Davies to my knowledge and as previously stated there were bigger mistakes from other players imo which have been glossed over, but lets not let any facts disrupt the witch hunt.
Did you seriously just quote Guscott to support your point?
Puja
I suppose you know better than Guscott?
What would you base your obvious superior ability to read the game on or are you just trotting out an opinion formed by the EMB illuminati?
I'm not claiming that I necessarily know better, for it is well known that I am a fool. I'm asking whether you have read anything written by Guscott in the past, or worse, met the tw*t in person.
Great rugby player. Appalling human being. A below average pundit. I'm just astounded that he's being referenced by a Welshman as a fount of truth; he's pretty much the epitome of English-stereotype that you love to hate!
Puja
Last edited by Puja on Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
cashead wrote:And assuming there are no injuries, there's a high likelihood that it'll be 1 of Ryan Crotty or Sonny Bill Williams at 12 and probably Anton Lienert-Brown at 13 lining up against the Lions. You want someone with a bit of staunch defence to hold them up.
You do get that with Joseph though, plus an attacking threat.
Puja wrote:
Did you seriously just quote Guscott to support your point?
Puja
I suppose you know better than Guscott?
What would you base your obvious superior ability to read the game on or are you just trotting out an opinion formed by the EMB illuminati?
I'm not claiming that I necessarily know better, for it is well known that I am a fool. I'm asking whether you have read anything written by Guscott in the past, or worse, met the tw*t in person.
Great rugby player. Appalling human being. A below average pundit. I'm just astounded that he's being referenced by a Welshman as a fount of truth; he's pretty much the epitome of English-stereotype that you love to hate!
Puja
I did not realise we were now discussing James Haskell.
Timbo wrote:Joseph is an excellent defender, but a lot more passive than JDavies.
aye, JJ is a brilliant drift defender, and organises his wing well, great communicator; Davies better set up as an out to in defender, but suspect he'd be stretched as a drifter out in NZ..just as JJ gets a little less good when head on.
I'd actually go with JJ looking at what's happening in games out there, but JD is by no means the player a lot seem to see- he's a very good intl 13, whose hands sometimes let him down.
Timbo wrote:Joseph is an excellent defender, but a lot more passive than JDavies.
aye, JJ is a brilliant drift defender, and organises his wing well, great communicator; Davies better set up as an out to in defender, but suspect he'd be stretched as a drifter out in NZ..just as JJ gets a little less good when head on.
I'd actually go with JJ looking at what's happening in games out there, but JD is by no means the player a lot seem to see- he's a very good intl 13, whose hands sometimes let him down.
In the Times a few weeks back Shane Williams was making the case that JD is the sort of centre who could play 10 such was the quality of JD's handling, so there's that to ponder on as it has the hallmarks of being a cogent piece of analysis by Shane!
Timbo wrote:Joseph is an excellent defender, but a lot more passive than JDavies.
aye, JJ is a brilliant drift defender, and organises his wing well, great communicator; Davies better set up as an out to in defender, but suspect he'd be stretched as a drifter out in NZ..just as JJ gets a little less good when head on.
I'd actually go with JJ looking at what's happening in games out there, but JD is by no means the player a lot seem to see- he's a very good intl 13, whose hands sometimes let him down.
In the Times a few weeks back Shane Williams was making the case that JD is the sort of centre who could play 10 such was the quality of JD's handling, so there's that to ponder on as it has the hallmarks of being a cogent piece of analysis by Shane!
Shane Williams has got to be one of the worst pundits I've ever read/heard. I think Nichol and Guscott are actually closer to the mark. He manages to punctuate his bland, meaningless platitudes with a very specific kind of nonsense.
Banquo wrote:
aye, JJ is a brilliant drift defender, and organises his wing well, great communicator; Davies better set up as an out to in defender, but suspect he'd be stretched as a drifter out in NZ..just as JJ gets a little less good when head on.
I'd actually go with JJ looking at what's happening in games out there, but JD is by no means the player a lot seem to see- he's a very good intl 13, whose hands sometimes let him down.
In the Times a few weeks back Shane Williams was making the case that JD is the sort of centre who could play 10 such was the quality of JD's handling, so there's that to ponder on as it has the hallmarks of being a cogent piece of analysis by Shane!
cripes, that's weird.
It was a brief piece, I think a short column selecting a XV which that day looked at 13s, where for instance Big Gav argues without bias for a Scottish selection, Shane argues without bias for a Welsh selection, and maybe it's what they honestly think, maybe they don't even write it and simply give permission for their name to be used for suitable payment. But of all the comments it's one that stands out, also I nearly fell down some steps going into an office building reading that comment
Timbo wrote:I was sat down reading it and I still nearly fell over.
Reasonably so. Maybe we're missing the point, but it would seem there are lots of things to praise about his game before claiming his handling provides an assured touch
Timbo wrote:I was sat down reading it and I still nearly fell over.
Reasonably so. Maybe we're missing the point, but it would seem there are lots of things to praise about his game before claiming his handling provides an assured touch
