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
Premiership Rugby / Premiership Cup
Gloucester Thread
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="Peat" data-source="post: 658566" data-attributes="member: 42330"><p>The argument was pretty clearly that the huge paucity of other players sharing their alleged dimensions and weight strains credulity to the claims of the gentlemen in question, illustrated by a couple of cases, as I rashly believed I wouldn't have to name too many as literally anyone with a reasonable memory for stats would notice the same thing. That was the central plank - focusing entirely on Tekori was pedantry.</p><p></p><p>While obviously people at the statistical edge of athleticism are super valuable and highly sought after, it should be stressed just how much of an outlier - nay, freak - Kitchener would be. For a guy to be that speed and that agile in the air, while being 19 stone and 6'6"... anyone think of 3 other guys like that? Here's a database to help people, it's reasonably accurate. I'd give Samu Manoa which brings me to my next point about Kitchener being that sort of freak. When a guy is that big and that quick, you can tell. It's pretty obvious. Manoa is clearly that sort of freak. Kitchener? Kitchener should be one of England's best ball carriers if he's 19 stone. He's not though. The overall picture of Kitchener based on players we can physically compare him to, how we see him play and his alleged physical statistics simply doesn't make sense.</p><p></p><p>As for Stooke - I'll buy the idea that he'll be 19 stone come game time. That's pretty plausible.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Peat, post: 658566, member: 42330"] The argument was pretty clearly that the huge paucity of other players sharing their alleged dimensions and weight strains credulity to the claims of the gentlemen in question, illustrated by a couple of cases, as I rashly believed I wouldn't have to name too many as literally anyone with a reasonable memory for stats would notice the same thing. That was the central plank - focusing entirely on Tekori was pedantry. While obviously people at the statistical edge of athleticism are super valuable and highly sought after, it should be stressed just how much of an outlier - nay, freak - Kitchener would be. For a guy to be that speed and that agile in the air, while being 19 stone and 6'6"... anyone think of 3 other guys like that? Here's a database to help people, it's reasonably accurate. I'd give Samu Manoa which brings me to my next point about Kitchener being that sort of freak. When a guy is that big and that quick, you can tell. It's pretty obvious. Manoa is clearly that sort of freak. Kitchener? Kitchener should be one of England's best ball carriers if he's 19 stone. He's not though. The overall picture of Kitchener based on players we can physically compare him to, how we see him play and his alleged physical statistics simply doesn't make sense. As for Stooke - I'll buy the idea that he'll be 19 stone come game time. That's pretty plausible. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
Premiership Rugby / Premiership Cup
Gloucester Thread
Top