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
Club World Cup
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="big ginger 8" data-source="post: 1099065" data-attributes="member: 53057"><p>There was 4 games last season where a large chunk of players from both teams shared the same pitch. These seem to have been ignored completely. Fair enough if you don't weigh them that much due to Foster's coaching but they're a lot more relevant than just listing players. It's a weak line of argument for me because that's all it was, a list, there wasn't even a comparison against their opposite numbers. If I did the same thing you would rightfully deride me for it. </p><p></p><p>I didn't intend to 'dismiss' Taylor and Barrett although I can see how it comes across as that. They however, are definitely not trump cards and I don't think the matches vs Bulls or La Rochelle change that for me. As said by Alpha already, I don't think Taylor makes the Leinster 23, he's a very good player but we have one of the best hooker duos out there. Similarly you name Havili who is class but definitely not as good as Henshaw for me The Crusaders' pack might be a monster pack but they are much more a monster pack in the same vein as Leinster than the La Rochelle pack. That is via being ruthlessly efficient at ruck time and smart in contact not by having a load of 125kg players who will smash into you all day and a very strong scrum. This is not saying the Crusaders do not have a very good scrum by the way but it would not be able to milk penalties the same way La Rochelle did.</p><p></p><p>You also like a certain subsection of people seem to have decided that Leinster have only got a rep for a strong pack because they beat up on weak packs in the league. Matches like the Toulouse one suggest it might not be as clear cut as that.</p><p></p><p>As to the bolded part, that might possibly be true now but I'd doubt it. Although it does depend what you're calling a NH competition with the increased blurring of the lines there. Obviously the lack of a tv partner hear will have killed viewing figures in Ireland and the UK but until then I'd have undoubtedly said more NH fans watched SR than vice versa. Certainly the amount of Australian's and NZers that watch NH rugby would always have struck me as very low and I don't really see how it would be easier for them. It's easier to watch a match at 8am on a Saturday morning rather than getting up at 4am on a Sunday...I can see it being the way in Argentian but I don't think you can generalise it to the SH.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="big ginger 8, post: 1099065, member: 53057"] There was 4 games last season where a large chunk of players from both teams shared the same pitch. These seem to have been ignored completely. Fair enough if you don't weigh them that much due to Foster's coaching but they're a lot more relevant than just listing players. It's a weak line of argument for me because that's all it was, a list, there wasn't even a comparison against their opposite numbers. If I did the same thing you would rightfully deride me for it. I didn't intend to 'dismiss' Taylor and Barrett although I can see how it comes across as that. They however, are definitely not trump cards and I don't think the matches vs Bulls or La Rochelle change that for me. As said by Alpha already, I don't think Taylor makes the Leinster 23, he's a very good player but we have one of the best hooker duos out there. Similarly you name Havili who is class but definitely not as good as Henshaw for me The Crusaders' pack might be a monster pack but they are much more a monster pack in the same vein as Leinster than the La Rochelle pack. That is via being ruthlessly efficient at ruck time and smart in contact not by having a load of 125kg players who will smash into you all day and a very strong scrum. This is not saying the Crusaders do not have a very good scrum by the way but it would not be able to milk penalties the same way La Rochelle did. You also like a certain subsection of people seem to have decided that Leinster have only got a rep for a strong pack because they beat up on weak packs in the league. Matches like the Toulouse one suggest it might not be as clear cut as that. As to the bolded part, that might possibly be true now but I'd doubt it. Although it does depend what you're calling a NH competition with the increased blurring of the lines there. Obviously the lack of a tv partner hear will have killed viewing figures in Ireland and the UK but until then I'd have undoubtedly said more NH fans watched SR than vice versa. Certainly the amount of Australian's and NZers that watch NH rugby would always have struck me as very low and I don't really see how it would be easier for them. It's easier to watch a match at 8am on a Saturday morning rather than getting up at 4am on a Sunday...I can see it being the way in Argentian but I don't think you can generalise it to the SH. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
Club World Cup
Top