RugbyRebels

Oops. My bad.

p/d wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:The justification for Farrell over Wilkinson there makes even less sense than I was expecting.

Farrell can play 12, but so can Wilkinson. Also Farrell is the currently in possession of the 10 shirt (where he isn't currently playing for England) in this hypothetical all-time XV.

He would have been better off just coming out with it; 'We in the press are obliged to elevate one player to a Saintly status well beyond their ability. Wilkinson was once the chosen one, now we have Owen Andrew Farrell.'

I will note that Wilkinson was worth the lionising that he got - he was a special player.

Also, I agree with Danno that OAF is clearly the sign of a 16 year old dad who didn't really like his new baby!

Puja

Beasties wrote:
Jones isn't really worth commenting on apart from the opportunity to chuckle obvs. He had Jack Goodhue down as 3/10 ffs, and he was fighting a lone battle at times.

Hair envy. I was similarly down on Duncan Taylor

Rich wrote:

Puja wrote:Found it and it is utterly bananas all the way down:


Puja

Some questionable choices there:

My all time XV is:

1. Mako
2. Thompson
3. Cotton
4. Johnson
5. Itoje
6. Teague
7. Hill
8. Dallaglio

9. Dawson
10. Jonny

11. Duckham
12. Sharp
13. Manu
14. Robinson
15. Guscott

I know, I know Jerry never played a test at full back but after Lomu used Catt as a doormat in 1995, I thought we'd be better off with Catt at inside centre, Carling at outside centre and Jerry at full back...Jerry should have been tried at 15 by at least one national coach.

Oh and Ojomoh at 14 to tackle Lomu.

You call his choices questionable!!! (I agree though)......but pick Sharp at 12 (never played there internationally, and tackling was hardly his forte), and Guscott at 15- I know you have tried to justify it, but why would you try one of the best 13's to ever play there (and way ahead of Carling, who would have been a poor outside centre imo, esp after he'd given up passing) at 15. Your pack is pretty spot on though

What am I forgetting about Thompson that made him better than George other than being a big carrier?

Mikey Brown wrote:What am I forgetting about Thompson that made him better than George other than being a big carrier?

isnt that enough?

Mikey Brown wrote:What am I forgetting about Thompson that made him better than George other than being a big carrier?

Banquo wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:What am I forgetting about Thompson that made him better than George other than being a big carrier?

isnt that enough?

It's enough. I've long been a George fan, I think he's such a good all rounder, just quality. But Thompson was too, but with the size and power to be a match winner, the memories of him rampaging around and through people are wonderful.

Loved Woodman and Vickery but I think Mako is probably the best prop in the world so I think he takes it and Sinkler you can't leave out, he's special.

Loved Back but Underhill is arguably player of the tournament. He's literally bitching some of the finest SH players of all time. Underhill for me.

Wilkinson over Farrell of course, definitely Greenwood over Farrell, no question. Greenwood was a very, very fine player.

Robinson, Lewsey and May back three probably for me, although Cohen in full flight was exceptional. May will just score many tries, out of nothing, he's hard to leave out.

Lol. “Literally”.

Mikey Brown wrote:Lol. “Literally”.

I can't remember what Thompson was poor at, was there anything?

TheDasher wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Lol. “Literally”.

I can't remember what Thompson was poor at, was there anything?

Yes. Losing blubber.

TheDasher wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Lol. “Literally”.

I can't remember what Thompson was poor at, was there anything?

Lineout throwing. He was very wobbly and when he threw to the back, you took a deep breath and prayed. Got better as he got older, but even at his best, he was nowhere near the precision and consistent accuracy of George.

I've changed my mind remembering that; I'd pick George for his lineout and handling skills, even if Thompson was a slightly better carrier.

Puja

Puja wrote:

TheDasher wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Lol. “Literally”.

I can't remember what Thompson was poor at, was there anything?

Lineout throwing. He was very wobbly and when he threw to the back, you took a deep breath and prayed. Got better as he got older, but even at his best, he was nowhere near the precision and consistent accuracy of George.

I've changed my mind remembering that; I'd pick George for his lineout and handling skills, even if Thompson was a slightly better carrier.

Puja

Now you mention it I remember. You've changed my mind too, literally nothing worse than a hooker throwing badly. George to start, Thompson off the bench, that would work wonderfully.

My heart STILL tells me Bracken over Dawson tbh...

TheDasher wrote:My heart STILL tells me Bracken over Dawson tbh...

Not alone. Like a hooker needs to be able to throw in, a scrum half has to pass well.

Puja

Banquo wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:What am I forgetting about Thompson that made him better than George other than being a big carrier?

isnt that enough?

Not when comparing darts for a start.

Puja wrote:

TheDasher wrote:My heart STILL tells me Bracken over Dawson tbh...

Not alone. Like a hooker needs to be able to throw in, a scrum half has to pass well.

Puja

Though that highly depends on what the pack wants and also what the FH wants. Passing as an isolated skill is massively overrated when it comes to SH play. As in most people think passing is the prime and be all skill when actually it is far from it. A scrum half is massively more than just a passer.

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

Puja wrote:

TheDasher wrote:My heart STILL tells me Bracken over Dawson tbh...

Not alone. Like a hooker needs to be able to throw in, a scrum half has to pass well.

Puja

Though that highly depends on what the pack wants and also what the FH wants. Passing as an isolated skill is massively overrated when it comes to SH play. As in most people think passing is the prime and be all skill when actually it is far from it. A scrum half is massively more than just a passer.

Of course a good SH is much more than just a passer. But passing is still a very basic and important component of his game. If he is a poor passer, he will never be a really top SH. I include in passing skills the ability to clear the ball consistently with speed and accuracy. One who cannot do it would probably be better playing in another position.
It's quite surprising that England can't find a better passer than Youngs, who does not compensate for this lack of a basic skill in other aspects of his SH play.

And yet has over 90 caps and is a multiple Lion......

Puja wrote:

TheDasher wrote:My heart STILL tells me Bracken over Dawson tbh...

Not alone. Like a hooker needs to be able to throw in, a scrum half has to pass well.

That's at least 3 of us.
As pre-requisites, I'd add that a winger needs to run fast, a prop needs to wrestle and a lock needs to jump

Epaminondas Pules wrote:And yet has over 90 caps and is a multiple Lion......

There is no denying he has a lot of caps, but still I feel he is a pretty average SH, and wonder how he got so many.

What a whirlwind of a discussion.

Spiffy wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:And yet has over 90 caps and is a multiple Lion......

There is no denying he has a lot of caps, but still I feel he is a pretty average SH, and wonder how he got so many.

Probably because multiple coaches rated him. That’d be my guess

Spiffy wrote: It's quite surprising that England can't find a better passer than Youngs, who does not compensate for this lack of a basic skill in other aspects of his SH play.

I will note that Youngs is actually a superb passer. If you rewatch the NZ game, he was taking tap downs from the front of the lineout and fizzing them 20m to a player running at pace.

Where his problem lies is consistency, especially when playing at pace. He'll make a lot of very good passes and then one dire one at someone's feet or at their head and that's the one people remember. Like Saturday - he made 3 shocking errors amongst some other exceptional play and people (on here) said he was terrible.

I'd actually rate his passing higher than that of Dawson, who had a bit of a spray and pray approach to all his passes. Fewer egregious errors than Youngs, but a larger number of small ones.

Puja

How he has so many caps is a mystery to me. But those caps alone suggest I don’t fully appreciate his worth, even if I think he consistently bottles putting his hands in where other 9’s don’t think twice.

Mind you Peter Wright can boast being a Lion, so who knows