On which base do you select players for the Hall of Fame

Discussion in 'General Rugby Union' started by bates, Oct 15, 2008.

  1. bates

    bates Guest

    Ez all, I first started this discussion here

    It was my opinion that bumped a bit with the opinion of Candybum, me saying that I would slect players who achieved great things as a team and /or as an individual.

    One of my remarks was that according to me, most players that would be selected and nominated would have won a cup or a WRC etc...
    Because players/teams that win prices are grifted in the memory of the general crowd.

    I'm not saying that oter players who fought for each ball, try etc... don't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame but if you look at other sports e.g:

    Basketball: Micheal Jordan and his Chicago Bulls, F1:Schumacher and Ferrari you 'll see that every winning team has a leader and elevates his team to a higher level.

    Who would have know Jordan or Schumacher if they didn't win anything???? :huh:

    Anyway feel free to share your thoughts on this one.

  2. Forum Ad Advertisement

  3. Steve-o

    Steve-o Guest

    Double sided coin this issue.
    For instance, somebody like Ashwin Willemse has won both the Tri-Nations and the World Cup, but he probably the worst Springbok wing in the last 10 years. He is so kak. Doesn't mean he's a great even though he has one the 2 biggest prizes in International rugby.
  4. bates

    bates Guest

    Fair enough, but with winning prizes I meant I player who actually helped the team.
    I can imagine that your example didn't play that many games :D

    Some of the example I gave were Tana, Lomu, Fitzpatrick etc...

    I think some of our international friends can give us some names of their local heroes, but as the top 5 rugby countries don't change that often I really doubt about the international fame of those players ( which isn't meant negative btw).
Enjoyed this thread? Register to post your reply - click here!

Share This Page