RugbyRebels

jngf wrote:

Raggs wrote:Premiership rugby uploads the full matches generally by Tuesday here: https://www.premiershiprugby.com/prtv/

Thanks very kindly, very useful site - that said, feel that even if I undertook a 100 day premiership binge watch, Scrumhead would argue the opposite point of view to me - such is the beauty of debate

Perhaps, but if you've watched the entire game, at least he wouldn't have an easy stick to beat you with.

Raggs wrote:

jngf wrote:

Raggs wrote:Premiership rugby uploads the full matches generally by Tuesday here: https://www.premiershiprugby.com/prtv/

Thanks very kindly, very useful site - that said, feel that even if I undertook a 100 day premiership binge watch, Scrumhead would argue the opposite point of view to me - such is the beauty of debate

Perhaps, but if you've watched the entire game, at least he wouldn't have an easy stick to beat you with.

And you might be able to see the point that he's making with your own eyes, rather than relying on his rhetorical eloquence.

Puja

Sorry. I missed this.

jngf - we often disagree, but it’s not a default position and it’s not malicious.

As the others have intimated, I just don’t think you can judge a player based upon watching highlights. I’m not picking on Ewers specifically here, but in quite a lot of cases, players can do some eye-catching things that look great on a highlight reel but otherwise have a relatively poor game (which obviously wouldn’t be apparent on the highlights).

As a prime example, I’m a huge fan of Alex Dombrandt but I think Zach Mercer generally makes a much more telling contribution across an 80 minute game. Having watched a lot of both, my opinion is that Dombrandt is a more talented, natural/instinctive player, but the Mercer is more consistently influential. Dombrandt is more likely to show up on the highlights but Mercer won’t necessarily (although he often does).

Does that make my position clearer?