NH club rugby
-
@gt12 said in NH club rugby:
@majorrage said in NH club rugby:
@gt12 said in NH club rugby:
@pot-hale said in NH club rugby:
That is why the likes of Jonathan Davies, Juan Martin Hernandez and John Rutherford, plus one or two others, would lie above Carter in my all-time list in terms of individual greatness. Davies, for example, spent most of his career playing for Wales while waiting in vain for a decent morsel of possession which he could run on to.
This where I stopped reading this ridiculous pile of horse shit.
Outside of this, I'm not sure he says anything that should be viewed as too controversial. Everybody knows that he has a chip about kiwis so there are a couple of the usual shots, but in reality I'm not sure his article is far off the truth.
Carters greatest achievements were test 2 lions 2005 and knockout phase of the 2015 world cup, that can't be denied. He oozed class for the most part in between, but these were certainly his highlights. Would have been as succesful consistently getting rubbish ball behind a backwards pack? Would the likes of Davies, Hernandez, Rutherford (no idea who this guy is) been as highly lauded if playing for the Crusaders and All Blacks?
> Fair questions, if you ask me.
What?
You assume that they would be good enough to be selected for the Crusaders, and the All Blacks, and then selected for more than 10 years, during which time they headed greats (Mehrts, Spencer) with nary a whisper, then saw off a number of good (Donald, Slade, Sops, Barrett, Hill) and world class (Evans, McAlister, Cruden) first fives.
He sure as shit wouldn't have been rejected by Llanelli or needed to fuck off to League, and wouldn't have spent his best years playing as a fullback, and probably would have lead the Lions to victory above the All Blacks, rather than hardly even getting selected! I doubt any of the names that Walrus mentioned would have been consistent enough over 10 years, to be the 1st or 2nd name on the All Black team sheet over that time.
I'd pick him ahead of Barrett now, if I had the chance.
Don't get me wrong, those other players are good, even greats. But, they never even dominated rugby in any way close to the way in which Carter has. So what if he has buttoned off since retiring and going to earn some coin up north?
He is deservedly the best 10 in the modern era (and IMO the second best player ever) because he was at the center of a decade of All Black dominance. Without him, I seriously doubt we would have ever become the team we are now. It's worth remembering that our period of incredible dominance started with him and McCaw arriving at the same time.
So, fuck the Walrus, and that question.
Speak with anyone who played with or against Davies in either code and you'll see that he had both the skill and the durability to have leapfrogged all but one or two on your list
-
@mikethesnow said in NH club rugby:
@gt12 said in NH club rugby:
@majorrage said in NH club rugby:
@gt12 said in NH club rugby:
@pot-hale said in NH club rugby:
That is why the likes of Jonathan Davies, Juan Martin Hernandez and John Rutherford, plus one or two others, would lie above Carter in my all-time list in terms of individual greatness. Davies, for example, spent most of his career playing for Wales while waiting in vain for a decent morsel of possession which he could run on to.
This where I stopped reading this ridiculous pile of horse shit.
Outside of this, I'm not sure he says anything that should be viewed as too controversial. Everybody knows that he has a chip about kiwis so there are a couple of the usual shots, but in reality I'm not sure his article is far off the truth.
Carters greatest achievements were test 2 lions 2005 and knockout phase of the 2015 world cup, that can't be denied. He oozed class for the most part in between, but these were certainly his highlights. Would have been as succesful consistently getting rubbish ball behind a backwards pack? Would the likes of Davies, Hernandez, Rutherford (no idea who this guy is) been as highly lauded if playing for the Crusaders and All Blacks?
> Fair questions, if you ask me.
What?
You assume that they would be good enough to be selected for the Crusaders, and the All Blacks, and then selected for more than 10 years, during which time they headed greats (Mehrts, Spencer) with nary a whisper, then saw off a number of good (Donald, Slade, Sops, Barrett, Hill) and world class (Evans, McAlister, Cruden) first fives.
He sure as shit wouldn't have been rejected by Llanelli or needed to fuck off to League, and wouldn't have spent his best years playing as a fullback, and probably would have lead the Lions to victory above the All Blacks, rather than hardly even getting selected! I doubt any of the names that Walrus mentioned would have been consistent enough over 10 years, to be the 1st or 2nd name on the All Black team sheet over that time.
I'd pick him ahead of Barrett now, if I had the chance.
Don't get me wrong, those other players are good, even greats. But, they never even dominated rugby in any way close to the way in which Carter has. So what if he has buttoned off since retiring and going to earn some coin up north?
He is deservedly the best 10 in the modern era (and IMO the second best player ever) because he was at the center of a decade of All Black dominance. Without him, I seriously doubt we would have ever become the team we are now. It's worth remembering that our period of incredible dominance started with him and McCaw arriving at the same time.
So, fuck the Walrus, and that question.
Speak with anyone who played with or against Davies in either code and you'll see that he had both the skill and the durability to have leapfrogged all but one or two on your list
I'm not suggesting that he isn't a great player. I saw him play, and I've watched the old stuff when he started out. I'm not suggesting he isn't great.
But, he's no Dan Carter. That's my point.
The Walrus seems to think that he has never earned it, but he moved to Christchurch boys after he made the Sth Island secondary schools team from Ellesmere College - which is the equivalent of fucking nowhere. He's that good. He'd be that good playing for whoever. He didn't make the All Blacks because he was fucking lucky.
That's the missing point here, he is the causative factor for many of the teams being as good as they are.
-
Blimey, I thought I might start some reaction here, but didn't quite expect the fly off the handle that I've got here ...
@gt12 said in NH club rugby:
You assume that they would be good enough to be selected for the Crusaders, and the All Blacks, and then selected for more than 10 years, during which time they headed greats (Mehrts, Spencer) with nary a whisper, then saw off a number of good (Donald, Slade, Sops, Barrett, Hill) and world class (Evans, McAlister, Cruden) first fives.
How much of Davies, JMH and Rutherford have you seen and did you watch? I don't know the latter at all so can't comment, but Davies was a hell of a player across two codes, many people will talk about him as one of the most gifted they had seen. Of your list of first-5's I'd only put Cruden, Barret & Evans as truly top tier and worth talking about holding off. Mehrts & Spencer were both well approaching use-by when Carter joined the scene, and I'm fairly confident that JMH could well have been selected at this point in time.
He sure as shit wouldn't have been rejected by Llanelli or needed to fuck off to League, and wouldn't have spent his best years playing as a fullback, and probably would have lead the Lions to victory above the All Blacks, rather than hardly even getting selected! I doubt any of the names that Walrus mentioned would have been consistent enough over 10 years, to be the 1st or 2nd name on the All Black team sheet over that time.
You are comparing professional to amateur here - league was professional back then, union wasn't. Thats why Davies moved. Your talk of consistency over 10 years is a fair point, but very few best of lists talk about this. Cullen is mentioned in loads of best-of lists as an example, but he really only had 3 years at the very top. Compare that to Muliaina who was a 10 year plus AB, consistently selected, but he's unlikely to make any best of lists.
I'd pick him ahead of Barrett now, if I had the chance.
Watched must Racing? I wouldn't. He's switched off now and this would be silly.
Don't get me wrong, those other players are good, even greats. But, they never even dominated rugby in any way close to the way in which Carter has. So what if he has buttoned off since retiring and going to earn some coin up north?
This isn't Walrus, or my argument.
He is deservedly the best 10 in the modern era (and IMO the second best player ever) because he was at the center of a decade of All Black dominance. Without him, I seriously doubt we would have ever become the team we are now. It's worth remembering that our period of incredible dominance started with him and McCaw arriving at the same time.
I'd say our greatest period of pure dominance, the 2012-2015 period was more about the team than any one player. Cruden played a lot of this too.
So, fuck the Walrus, and that question.
Agree to the former, but not the latter.
-
I’ve watched enough to know that Carter is better. It’s that simple.
I’m not arguing that they weren’t good, or even great, just simply that Carter is significantly better.
You’ve rightly pointed out the difference between the Amateur and professional eras, but it’s not me me who put those together - that was the Walrus and you.
I wonder how many would select Davies ahead of his contemporaries? some good players then - no Lions tour when he was at his best, sadly, but would you pick him above Lynagh, Fox, Andrews? Given what the game was then?
Rutherford couldn’t even break into the Lions team in 1983 (he played inside center), despite being a great player. Even he explained why (I can dig up the interview). Don’t get me wrong, he was super exciting, and helped win a Grand Slam, but couldn’t even get selected for the premier tram of his generation.
And Hernandez played most of his best rugby at 15. Amazing player, vet Barret-esque.
These guys were awesome, but they are simply just not as good as Dan Carter. He’s the most complete 10 of the modern era (and all time IMO) and shouldn’t be judged by his activities since retiring.
-
@gt12 said in NH club rugby:
@mikethesnow said in NH club rugby:
@gt12 said in NH club rugby:
@majorrage said in NH club rugby:
@gt12 said in NH club rugby:
@pot-hale said in NH club rugby:
That is why the likes of Jonathan Davies, Juan Martin Hernandez and John Rutherford, plus one or two others, would lie above Carter in my all-time list in terms of individual greatness. Davies, for example, spent most of his career playing for Wales while waiting in vain for a decent morsel of possession which he could run on to.
This where I stopped reading this ridiculous pile of horse shit.
Outside of this, I'm not sure he says anything that should be viewed as too controversial. Everybody knows that he has a chip about kiwis so there are a couple of the usual shots, but in reality I'm not sure his article is far off the truth.
Carters greatest achievements were test 2 lions 2005 and knockout phase of the 2015 world cup, that can't be denied. He oozed class for the most part in between, but these were certainly his highlights. Would have been as succesful consistently getting rubbish ball behind a backwards pack? Would the likes of Davies, Hernandez, Rutherford (no idea who this guy is) been as highly lauded if playing for the Crusaders and All Blacks?
> Fair questions, if you ask me.
What?
You assume that they would be good enough to be selected for the Crusaders, and the All Blacks, and then selected for more than 10 years, during which time they headed greats (Mehrts, Spencer) with nary a whisper, then saw off a number of good (Donald, Slade, Sops, Barrett, Hill) and world class (Evans, McAlister, Cruden) first fives.
He sure as shit wouldn't have been rejected by Llanelli or needed to fuck off to League, and wouldn't have spent his best years playing as a fullback, and probably would have lead the Lions to victory above the All Blacks, rather than hardly even getting selected! I doubt any of the names that Walrus mentioned would have been consistent enough over 10 years, to be the 1st or 2nd name on the All Black team sheet over that time.
I'd pick him ahead of Barrett now, if I had the chance.
Don't get me wrong, those other players are good, even greats. But, they never even dominated rugby in any way close to the way in which Carter has. So what if he has buttoned off since retiring and going to earn some coin up north?
He is deservedly the best 10 in the modern era (and IMO the second best player ever) because he was at the center of a decade of All Black dominance. Without him, I seriously doubt we would have ever become the team we are now. It's worth remembering that our period of incredible dominance started with him and McCaw arriving at the same time.
So, fuck the Walrus, and that question.
Speak with anyone who played with or against Davies in either code and you'll see that he had both the skill and the durability to have leapfrogged all but one or two on your list
I'm not suggesting that he isn't a great player. I saw him play, and I've watched the old stuff when he started out. I'm not suggesting he isn't great.
But, he's no Dan Carter. That's my point.
The Walrus seems to think that he has never earned it, but he moved to Christchurch boys after he made the Sth Island secondary schools team from Ellesmere College - which is the equivalent of fucking nowhere. He's that good. He'd be that good playing for whoever. He didn't make the All Blacks because he was fucking lucky.
That's the missing point here, he is the causative factor for many of the teams being as good as they are.
The key words that slipped by you were 'leapfrogged all but one or two on your list'.
I'd have Carter at No. 1 too, but Davies could have and would have run him close IMHO.
And yes I'd have Davies ahead of Lynagh, Fox and Rob Andrew (if that is who you were referencing)
-
@gt12 The amateur vs professional was only used by me to point out why Davies went to league. It's hard to really form a view on if Carter would have gone to league if the same circumstances were applied.
I'm not saying the Walrus is right, btw, I'm just saying that as an opinion piece (which it was), it raises discusses some fair points.
FWIW - I'm not sure how much he believes of what he's written there, and Carter is certainly rightly recognized globally as one of the all time greats.
-
It's not just what the Walrus says, it's how he says it as well. He just comes across as a snide prick.
Nonetheless he does ask some pertinent questions namely that in playing for a dominant side a player will look better than if he was in an also ran side. That does not denigrate Carter in anyway IMO but of course because it is the Walrus it does come across that way.
Of the players that he mentions none of them to my mind come close to Carter as a complete 10, even taking into account the differences between the amateur and professional times. Davies was a great player, one of he most skilful and talented ball players of all times. As an attacking 10 there were not many to compare, but his kicking game, defence and game management were nowhere near Carter's standards. JMH was just too flaky to be considered. Great to watch but by the cringe he could fuck things royally. Rutherford was a class act, that he dd not get picked at 10 for the 1983 Lions was down to him being, to a degree the new kid on the block and the incumbent, Ollie Cambell was pretty damn good himself. Rutherford was still good enough to get in at an unfamiliar position though which speaks volumes for the man.
But back to Carter, the Walrus' point that would Carter have been as successful in a team other than NZ is valid but he should also bracket that with the question, would NZ have been as successful without Carter and I think the answer to both of them is probably not. Each enhances the other.
-
He's entirely right, most of the Premiership clubs (bar Exeter, my heroes with their mostly home grown championship winning talent) are losing money, being held above water by rich idiots. The exodus to the NH would be much lower if those clubs lived within their means like NZ SR teams are now
Charles Piutau deal 'wrecking' Premiership rugby - Sale boss
Sale Sharks DoR Steve Diamond believes Charles Piutau's record-breaking £1-million per season deal is wrecking Premiership rugby, inflating the value of player contracts too much.
-
-
Been rumours about Wasps finances after the owner injected 1.1m back into the club and falsified* it as profits so that they wouldn't breech the terms of a bond issue taken out when they bought Ricoh Arena and moved to Coventry.
A google search looks quite gloomy,
Dec 21, 2017: Wasps overstates profits amid accounting 'irregularities' - The Telegraph
Dec 21, 2017: Wasps breach rules of £35million bonds schemeDec 22, 2017: Price of Wasps bonds falls after it breaches financial rules of ...
Jan 13, 2018: Wasps seeks bondholders agreement after covenants are breached
Jan 19, 2018: Wasps bondholders agree to waive breaches in financial rules ...
23/03/2018: Wasps Group says accounts will be filed by end of March
13/04/2018: Wasps Group accounts now more than three months late
2/05/2018: PwC offside as Wasps auditor after £1.1m profit overstatement
3/05/2018: Irish owner reveals PwC given 'falsified evidence' in Wasps audit
but .... looks OK?
20 hours ago: Wasps owner slashes losses
The group that owns Premiership rugby club Wasps, who play their home games at Coventry's Ricoh Arena, has slashed its pre-tax losses, according to new figures.
Newly filed accounts with Companies House for Wasps Holdings have revealed that the group made a pre-tax loss of £3.7m in the year to 30 June 2017, down from £9.3m in 2016.
The documents have also confirmed that PwC, during its auditing enquiries, was presented with evidence which was revealed to have been falsified.
Following the presentation of PwC's findings, the board conducted a review of its financial processes, systems and controls across the group.
The directors have said this was an "isolated instance" and "consider that the measures put in place provide additional controls to prevent such an occurrence."
The group, which also owns the Ricoh Arena and a netball team, announced its turnover for the year, a rise from £30.9m to £33.6m, in December 2017.
Regarding the cut in losses, a statement signed off by the board said: "This is a result of returns form our improvements in ticketing, hotel, entertainment and business revenues, together with the non-reoccurrence of exceptional items and bond issue costs.
"The Wasps rugby team performed exceptionally well throughout the year, reaching the Premiership final for the first time since 2008.
"In addition, the newly launched Wasps Netball won the Vitality netball Super League, a wonderful result for the team in its very first year.
"The group continues to seek to maximise its use of the Ricoh. The continued engagement with new fans, businesses, clubs and schools resulted in another year of record attendances for Wasps and business activities at the arena.
"The investment in the DoubleTree by Hilton hotel during 2015/16 provided further significant returns with hotel income up by 29 per cent for the year.
"This year saw us staging a number of events including international rugby league, Robbie Williams in concert, Wasps Netball in the Ericsson Arena and we look forward to hosting more sport and entertainment in the future years."
Bond price:
- allegedly and apparantly ......
-
Leinster out-French the French in the Champions Cup final in Bilbao.
Leinster 15-12 Racing92
Yee haa!
-
Poxy final decided in multiples of 3. Teddy Thomas with a schoolboy error allowing himself to be bundled into touch after Racing steal the line out. From resulting play Leinster get the winning penalty.
-
-
@billy-tell said in NH club rugby:
Poxy final decided in multiples of 3. Teddy Thomas with a schoolboy error allowing himself to be bundled into touch after Racing steal the line out. From resulting play Leinster get the winning penalty.
Yep.
Last night's match was far better viewing
-
-
@bovidae said in NH club rugby:
I recorded the game but as DC didn't play and I already know the scoring I won't bother.
I only half watched it after realising it wasn't going to be DCs 'serious rugby' swansong. Probably not far of in speculation that DCs absence was the losing of the game. Firstly I very much doubt he would have made the stupid offside error his replacement did that gifted Leinster the win. Secondly, I'd back him to make the drop goal at the end to equalise.
-
Game was rubbish. It wasn't anywhere near as intense as journalists will try and make you believe. It was a classic example of two teams playing well within themselves to try and avoid making a mistake.
The semi finals were both much much better. Taking the show piece to non rugby country for game growth is a good idea, but then having both teams play a sport which was about as entertaining as watching paint dry worked against it.
The whole mic'ing up of referees needs a rethink too when Barnes is in charge. He doesn't shut up, ever. At one point he shouted at the teams "fair contest from both 7's, fair contest from both 7's". Why does that need to be done?? If it's a fair contest just bloody say nothing.
-
-
@bovidae said in NH club rugby:
@crucial Lambie went off injured early too.
Yep, so I suppose it could be argued that DC would have been replaced by that other numpty by the pointy end of the game anyway.
Flip side is that DC may have (like he did in other games) created the opportunities for points earlier.
I was pissed off that he wasn't playing after all the stupid press about whether he was better than Sexton.
Sexton was very average.
