Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
Banned substances in rugby
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TRF Mr Fish" data-source="post: 605336" data-attributes="member: 20892"><p>Ok, first of all, Vunipola is a number 8. Regardless, he's still only the same size as Lomu, but significantly slower. Tuilagi is 10cm's shorter and weighs almost 20kg's less than Lomu did.</p><p></p><p>Lomu was fast and powerful, and had a fend like Cory Jane. I don't think you understand how potent Lomu was on attack. </p><p></p><p>Yes, Lomu wasn't a great kicker, nor was his passing game anything to gloat about, but he didn't need these things, what's the point in chipping the ball over the fullback when you can literally run right over them? Just because he didn't possess the skills of a first five it doesn't mean he wasn't a good rugby player. </p><p></p><p>When picking between two players, one with a greater skill set and one who is going to have a larger positive effect on the game, I know who'd I'd go for, and I know who I'd say is the better rugby player. They're one and the same, just because you don't possess all the skills rugby players can use it doesn't mean you're any less valuable.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TRF Mr Fish, post: 605336, member: 20892"] Ok, first of all, Vunipola is a number 8. Regardless, he's still only the same size as Lomu, but significantly slower. Tuilagi is 10cm's shorter and weighs almost 20kg's less than Lomu did. Lomu was fast and powerful, and had a fend like Cory Jane. I don't think you understand how potent Lomu was on attack. Yes, Lomu wasn't a great kicker, nor was his passing game anything to gloat about, but he didn't need these things, what's the point in chipping the ball over the fullback when you can literally run right over them? Just because he didn't possess the skills of a first five it doesn't mean he wasn't a good rugby player. When picking between two players, one with a greater skill set and one who is going to have a larger positive effect on the game, I know who'd I'd go for, and I know who I'd say is the better rugby player. They're one and the same, just because you don't possess all the skills rugby players can use it doesn't mean you're any less valuable. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
Banned substances in rugby
Top