Nah I wouldn't put Percy at 15, tough between FdP and Joost. I agree Gerber could have been a legend.
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Greatest World XV Ever 'Past and Present'
- Thread starter lance2010
- Start date
King_D'Arcy
First XV
I have a strong feeling you haven't got a clue about Gareth Edwards
Or seen him play!
FlukeArtist
Bench Player
Mine is picked soley from players that have played in the professional era.
Comparing players of the 60s and 70s to modern players is like comparing apples and oranges. You cannot rate a prop from teh 60s against a prop of the modern era. The positional play for a prop has changed so much since then (and ditto fir size/strength requirments of the position)
So here is my 15:
1. Olo Brown
2. Sean Fitzpatrick
3. Carl Hayman
4. John Eales
5. Martin Johnson
6. Michael Jones
7. Richie McCaw
8. Zinzan Brooke
9. George Gregan
10. Daniel Carter
11. Jonah Lomu
12. Tana Umaga
13. Frank Bunce
14. Jeff Wilson
15. Christian Cullen
Res:
16. Keith Wood/Bismarck Du Plessis
17. Tony Woodcock
18. Ian Jones
19. Rocky Elsom
20. Augustin Pichot
21. Carlos Spencer
22. Stirling Mortlock
YEAH... there is a NZ bias, but if i'm completely honest, I believe the '97 All Blacks were the most complete rugby team to ever take the field.
Every player was the best in his position at the time.
Comparing players of the 60s and 70s to modern players is like comparing apples and oranges. You cannot rate a prop from teh 60s against a prop of the modern era. The positional play for a prop has changed so much since then (and ditto fir size/strength requirments of the position)
So here is my 15:
1. Olo Brown
2. Sean Fitzpatrick
3. Carl Hayman
4. John Eales
5. Martin Johnson
6. Michael Jones
7. Richie McCaw
8. Zinzan Brooke
9. George Gregan
10. Daniel Carter
11. Jonah Lomu
12. Tana Umaga
13. Frank Bunce
14. Jeff Wilson
15. Christian Cullen
Res:
16. Keith Wood/Bismarck Du Plessis
17. Tony Woodcock
18. Ian Jones
19. Rocky Elsom
20. Augustin Pichot
21. Carlos Spencer
22. Stirling Mortlock
YEAH... there is a NZ bias, but if i'm completely honest, I believe the '97 All Blacks were the most complete rugby team to ever take the field.
Every player was the best in his position at the time.
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2007
- Messages
- 8,310
- Reaction score
- 4
Disagree, the 2005/06 vintage were just as lethal.
Disagree completely, basically people with this attitude automatically say that we can disregard rugby prior to the professional era, its all a kop out in me eyes because people don't want to acknowledge that there were some pretty decent NH guys flying around. The fact is Gareth Edwards would still have been god in the pro era, he had all the skills, tricks in the book etc. People who say otherwise clearly have not seen enough, or as just copping out by saying cant compare rugby from the past to the present. Its not a valid excuse.
Perfectly valid argument actually: In the amateur era Lomu was the biggest superstar to ever grace the game. These days everyone seems to have a bigger and faster winger in their ranks.
Yet Lomu was a great of the game ...
You missed the point completely. Back then there was no-one else like him, now a player of his size and agility is pretty un-remarkable.
And so therefore Lomu cannot be considered a great by that logic and only modern players can be counted because of size and the speed of the game. Unreal.
Oh for **** sake....
FlukeArtist
Bench Player
@ Cymro
So you disagree with me completely that proping has changed between the 60's and modern times- is that what you're saying?
Because, if you honestly don't think the position (along with body shapes, skill sets etc) has changed, then you cannot have watched much of the older stuff. Props are totaly different players to what they are now.
Example:
Wilson Whineray played between '57 and '65 for NZ.
1.83m tall, and 94kg.
Tony Woodcock (current NZ prop):
1.84m tall, and 118kg.
Thats a huge difference. I would suggest Whineray would get monstered in a scrum these days.
But thats not to say he wasn't a great player. I'm just saying the game has changed too much to compare as to who was teh best. Hence my rationale in only selecting from the professional era (ie: '95 onwards)
By the way: Lomu still played well in the professional era- it was only the kidney disease that slowed him down.
So you disagree with me completely that proping has changed between the 60's and modern times- is that what you're saying?
Because, if you honestly don't think the position (along with body shapes, skill sets etc) has changed, then you cannot have watched much of the older stuff. Props are totaly different players to what they are now.
Example:
Wilson Whineray played between '57 and '65 for NZ.
1.83m tall, and 94kg.
Tony Woodcock (current NZ prop):
1.84m tall, and 118kg.
Thats a huge difference. I would suggest Whineray would get monstered in a scrum these days.
But thats not to say he wasn't a great player. I'm just saying the game has changed too much to compare as to who was teh best. Hence my rationale in only selecting from the professional era (ie: '95 onwards)
By the way: Lomu still played well in the professional era- it was only the kidney disease that slowed him down.
Probably tell you know I have watched just as much old skool Rugby as I have professional rugby, which is quite a bit.
Good on you to show me some stats, built differently yes no doubt but the technique, id say scrummaging was harder back in the day. Scrummaging now is all about the hit, get the hit wrong and the top level props just collapse the scrum to stop the disadvantage. Problem lies with the 4 step rule for engagement which quite frankly causes problems in itself. With the fold in, id argue it was tougher, speaking to current and past players who have done both, they would also agree that it was tougher to scrummage then than it is now.
That front three id back against any front row three you could name, they had everything, each one could scrummage, tackle and offer themselves round the park. Seriously out-scrummaged opponents and Bobby Windsor was as hard as nails! For me the closest modern day prop is Carl Hayman who is for me is the greatest professional era prop to be!
Jonah Lome would still be good. Would have quite the same impact? Maybe not, but he was a winger who was 6'5'' 119kgs and could run 100m in 11 seconds. No one else ever is quite that big and fast. You can say Matt Banahan, Epi Taione, Alesana Tuilagi etc, who are all big and devestating wingers of 115kgs +, but Lomu was still much faster than all of them. He was a freak. Yes, players would perhaps do better, but I think Lomu would still be regarded as a world class winger if he played today.
The reason why I don't like including older players, isn't that I don't want to give credit where credit is due. Gareth Edwards was a great halfback. He was the best of his time (I prefer Sid Going but that's just me). The point being though, the game has changed. Here is how much the game has changed.
1. Props could be from anywhere of 85kgs-110kgs as depending how far back you go. The heaviest props of the 1950's-60's would not have been as high as 105kgs. You cannot compare players who work on the farm for their living, to players who get their living bulking up and practising. The rules and regulations around scrummaging have fairly dramatically changed as well. The engage was a lot less controlled, and you could almost get a slight run in on the engage.
2. Hookers didn't throw in the lineouts in the 60's.
3. Locks didn't jump in the lineouts till the 90's. Colin Meads who is regarded in NZ as one of the worlds best players and locks, could not play the modern game. He's 6'2'' tall, and didn't ever get lifted in a lineout.
4. Flankers were very rarely over 95kgs going back a little as the 1980's. Rucking was in. You could pretty much stomp the **** out of a flanker you didn't like. Richie McCaw would have died by now.
5. Haflback primary roles were to clear the ball out of the ruck as quickly as possible. Sid Going and Gareth Edwards were famous for their darts around the outside, but the defence around the rucks are much more organised now, then they were then, as the game has changed. He may well be as effective now as then, but I simply don't know if he would.
6. 1st 5/8ths kicked a lot more and ran a whole lot less. It wasn't really until the late 80's and early 90's when fly halfs were really expected to have a good running game (even later in the NH
)
7. Wingers like David Campese, John Kerwin and Bernie Frasier, would get absolutely destroyed by wingers like Habana, Rokocoko and Ngwenya. That's not arrogance, that's a face. Wingers have got a whole lot bigger and faster in the last 15 years. Inga Tuigamala was considered huge when he was only 94kgs, and that was the early 90's. We've already said part of Lomu's legacy and success, was he was the first monster winger. There are now plenty of wingers in a Lomu mold, and the game has adapted to try and counter that. Wingers no longer throw at all in the lineout, however wingers like Ron Jardin would score the tries, kick the conversions and throw in the lineout.
8. Patterns have changed so much, and defences so much, both in the backline and forwards.
The point I'm trying to make is that it is a very different game to what was played pre the professional era. No one is saying "they're sh*t" or anything like that, simply that we can't know how they would play the modern game, with players who are bigger, faster and play with different rules and conditioning. You can sort of measure how well a players who played in the mid 90's, would do today, as they played mainly under the same rules, and there are plenty of players around today, that played with 90's legends. But the further back you go, it's just harder to tell how they'd do. You can't possibly measure potential. The argument that "If so-and-so and the same conditioning as the modern athlete, then they'd be just as good" is impossible to say. It's the equivelent of saying "If I had the up bringing and training of Daniel Carter, I could be an All Black". Possibly, but how the hell can that be tested and proved?
The reason why I don't like including older players, isn't that I don't want to give credit where credit is due. Gareth Edwards was a great halfback. He was the best of his time (I prefer Sid Going but that's just me). The point being though, the game has changed. Here is how much the game has changed.
1. Props could be from anywhere of 85kgs-110kgs as depending how far back you go. The heaviest props of the 1950's-60's would not have been as high as 105kgs. You cannot compare players who work on the farm for their living, to players who get their living bulking up and practising. The rules and regulations around scrummaging have fairly dramatically changed as well. The engage was a lot less controlled, and you could almost get a slight run in on the engage.
2. Hookers didn't throw in the lineouts in the 60's.
3. Locks didn't jump in the lineouts till the 90's. Colin Meads who is regarded in NZ as one of the worlds best players and locks, could not play the modern game. He's 6'2'' tall, and didn't ever get lifted in a lineout.
4. Flankers were very rarely over 95kgs going back a little as the 1980's. Rucking was in. You could pretty much stomp the **** out of a flanker you didn't like. Richie McCaw would have died by now.
5. Haflback primary roles were to clear the ball out of the ruck as quickly as possible. Sid Going and Gareth Edwards were famous for their darts around the outside, but the defence around the rucks are much more organised now, then they were then, as the game has changed. He may well be as effective now as then, but I simply don't know if he would.
6. 1st 5/8ths kicked a lot more and ran a whole lot less. It wasn't really until the late 80's and early 90's when fly halfs were really expected to have a good running game (even later in the NH
)7. Wingers like David Campese, John Kerwin and Bernie Frasier, would get absolutely destroyed by wingers like Habana, Rokocoko and Ngwenya. That's not arrogance, that's a face. Wingers have got a whole lot bigger and faster in the last 15 years. Inga Tuigamala was considered huge when he was only 94kgs, and that was the early 90's. We've already said part of Lomu's legacy and success, was he was the first monster winger. There are now plenty of wingers in a Lomu mold, and the game has adapted to try and counter that. Wingers no longer throw at all in the lineout, however wingers like Ron Jardin would score the tries, kick the conversions and throw in the lineout.
8. Patterns have changed so much, and defences so much, both in the backline and forwards.
The point I'm trying to make is that it is a very different game to what was played pre the professional era. No one is saying "they're sh*t" or anything like that, simply that we can't know how they would play the modern game, with players who are bigger, faster and play with different rules and conditioning. You can sort of measure how well a players who played in the mid 90's, would do today, as they played mainly under the same rules, and there are plenty of players around today, that played with 90's legends. But the further back you go, it's just harder to tell how they'd do. You can't possibly measure potential. The argument that "If so-and-so and the same conditioning as the modern athlete, then they'd be just as good" is impossible to say. It's the equivelent of saying "If I had the up bringing and training of Daniel Carter, I could be an All Black". Possibly, but how the hell can that be tested and proved?
fatmanbiscuit
Academy Player
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2011
- Messages
- 1
- Reaction score
- 0
FYC
1. Os du Randt
2. Keith Wood
3. Jason Leonard
4. Frik du Preez
5. Victor Matfield
6. Francios Pienaar (C) - not the best flanker, but the best leader
7. Richie McCaw
8. Zinzan Brooke
9. Gareth Edwards
10. Dan Carter
11. Jonah Lomu
12. Danie Gerber
13. Phillipe Sella
14. Carl du Plessis
15. JPR Williams
Coach. Kitch Christie
1. Os du Randt
2. Keith Wood
3. Jason Leonard
4. Frik du Preez
5. Victor Matfield
6. Francios Pienaar (C) - not the best flanker, but the best leader
7. Richie McCaw
8. Zinzan Brooke
9. Gareth Edwards
10. Dan Carter
11. Jonah Lomu
12. Danie Gerber
13. Phillipe Sella
14. Carl du Plessis
15. JPR Williams
Coach. Kitch Christie
Going out on a stretch here. You're South African?
That front three id back against any front row three you could name, they had everything, each one could scrummage, tackle and offer themselves round the park. Seriously out-scrummaged opponents and Bobby Windsor was as hard as nails! For me the closest modern day prop is Carl Hayman who is for me is the greatest professional era prop to be!
Sam Owen
First XV
Im not one of those latest-is-greatest types. Jonah I feel would be devastating today as he was back then. You just gotta watch Jonahs highlights on youtube and you'll instantly notice that wingers these days cant score those kind of tries where he just beats 5 or 6 players, bumps off 100kg+ props, runs over the top of people and out sprints his opposite.
Heres an easy experiment= get some people to watch Lomus highlights package on youtube and then get them to watch any winger or wingers of your choices package on youtube. When thats done ask them who would you want on the wing for your team.
Heres an easy experiment= get some people to watch Lomus highlights package on youtube and then get them to watch any winger or wingers of your choices package on youtube. When thats done ask them who would you want on the wing for your team.
187
Academy Player
McCaw is the greatest 7... EVER
The thing is there that the power of the attack may not be weak by todays standards, but the ability of the defenders is 10 fold better then anything we could have dreamt of 15 years ago. Back then, Tim Rodber was the only player who ever managed a dump tackle (solo) on big Jonah. Then about 8ish years ago, little George Greegan did the same thing to him. Now we see the likes of Paul Diggin bashing through Tuilagi, Ben Foden giving scottish 2nd rows a concussion by running at them and numerous 12s routinely demolishing number 8s - meanwhile fly-halves pick up and run with props while the props themselves sidestep and do 50m runs.
The great players of yesteryear maybe could be competitive in the modern game, but since professionalism the players are biggers, stronger, faster and over-all more skilful. They wouldn't have an advantage of just having the natural flair for the game any more because the modern player is taught how to think and is instinctively trained to know what to expect, (supposedly) particularly at test level.
The great players of yesteryear maybe could be competitive in the modern game, but since professionalism the players are biggers, stronger, faster and over-all more skilful. They wouldn't have an advantage of just having the natural flair for the game any more because the modern player is taught how to think and is instinctively trained to know what to expect, (supposedly) particularly at test level.
