Split: SavageLes protests that he's not a South African (but fails miserably)

[admartian]

Stats are all well and good mate, but it's HOW they play that matters - the INTANGIBLES. Steyn does not have the same presence in running, and tactical kicking and AWARENESS than Dan.

Now, what one may seem to misconceive this general fact that Dan is better, is that they think we're saying that Morne is therefore 'crap'.

No - far from it.

The POINT is, he isn't better, and does not have that X-factor. It cannot be quantified, but people just know what that is, and can see it. Is Morne very, very, very good, and possibly top 1-3? Yes, no doubt.

Better at Dan OVERALL? No.

I hope you understand, and don't take it personally...

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Super 14 isn't "at the moment" though (seeing as you're so insistent on using that phrase) - the summer internationals are. Carter played better than Steyn in the summer internationals, so is better "at the moment"

 

[SavageLez]

Stats are all well and good mate, but it's HOW they play that matters - the INTANGIBLES. Steyn does not have the same presence in running, and tactical kicking and AWARENESS than Dan.

Now, what one may seem to misconceive this general fact that Dan is better, is that they think we're saying that Morne is therefore 'crap'.

No - far from it.

The POINT is, he isn't better, and does not have that X-factor. It cannot be quantified, but people just know what that is, and can see it. Is Morne very, very, very good, and possibly top 1-3? Yes, no doubt.

Better at Dan OVERALL? No.

I hope you understand, and don't take it personally...

Good post! I also want to reiterate that just because I feel Morne Steyn is better on current form I don't expect anybody to agree with me. I am expressing my opinion basing it on recent matches and results. On current form I would pick Morne over Dan in my Super 14 and Tri Nations side. In 2006 there would be no doubt that Dan would be my man and similarly in 2003 Wilkinson would be in my starting line up.

Dan Carter and Wilkinson in top peak and form is great and I would love for them to get back to their best. It would bode well for the rugby 2011 World Cup in NZ. I can't wait!

 

[admartian]

Good post! I also want to reiterate that just because I feel Morne Steyn is better on current form I don't expect anybody to agree with me. I am expressing my opinion basing it on recent matches and results. On current form I would pick Morne over Dan in my Super 14 and Tri Nations side. In 2006 there would be no doubt that Dan would be my man and similarly in 2003 Wilkinson would be in my starting line up.

Dan Carter and Wilkinson in top peak and form is great and I would love for them to get back to their best. It would bode well for the rugby 2011 World Cup in NZ. I can't wait!

Fair enough. Morne is indeed an underrated 10. I definitely would have him in my World XV bench any day.

 

[Iron Mike]

I totally agree with you Mike,

I wanted to add that to my post but did not bother. I think NZ and SA need to be wary of the Ozzies. They have a potent side capable of beating any team on a given day!
Quade Cooper is a magician and they are in a position right now where every player is fighting for his spot in the side. They do look a little bit weak in the front row but I don't believe to such an extent that hey can't exploit teams with their fantastic backs!

Well, the front row is weak because it is pretty much a 3rd/4th choice front row, the likes of Kefu, Moore and Alexander (the prop who scored 7 tries in the Super 14) are injured.

 

[SavageLez]

Well, the front row is weak because it is pretty much a 3rd/4th choice front row, the likes of Kefu, Moore and Alexander (the prop who scored 7 tries in the Super 14) are injured.

I know that but that goes to show that OZ have no depth in that department. If SA, NZ or ENG had a couple injuries upfront there are always good props and hookers to fill the void.

 

[alex]

Listen, Dan Carter is a magician and wow he was great when he was on top of his game. He is showing glimpses of that again in the winter incoming tour matches.

All I am saying really is that Morne Steyn is performing better than him at present. Morne Steyn was nominated and awarded the SUPER 14 Player of the year. He was the top try (5 tries) scoring fly half in this years Super 14 and overall points scorer in 2009 and 2010 Super 14. He was also very influentual in the Bulls scoring 51 tries, the most in this years Super 14.

Dan Carter only scored 1 try the entire Super 14 and contributed to only 34 of the Crusaders 46 tries this season as he was rested against the Lions and the Cheetahs where Colin Slade played and 12 tries were scored.

hmmm 51 tries in 1 super 14 eh? not bad.

 

[smartcooky]

Savage
Who gives a flying fig about who played who and who's got what trophy?

A team is only as good as their next performance. Any real sportsman will tell you that.

Bullitt
I know your profile says you're from Northants, but do you actually come from somewhere further north, like Whitehaven or Barrow

 

[Teh Mite]

What?


.
..
...

 

[SavageLez]

Savage
Who gives a flying fig about who played who and who's got what trophy?

A team is only as good as their next performance. Any real sportsman will tell you that.

Smart (not so smart) cooky: If you took the time to read the threads you obviously do care, if you don't care then don't reply to the thread. We are all having a great discussion here. don't need stupid comments like that.

And by the way, A team is only as good as their last performance. Any real sportsman will tell you that!

 

[King_D'Arcy]

Fair enough. Morne is indeed an underrated 10. I definitely would have him in my World XV bench any day.

Morne is very highly rated...

 

[SavageLez]

We are all going on about Morne Steyn and Dan Carter. SA and NZ are going to have to keep an eye on Quade Cooper. He reminds me a lot of Carlos Spencer at his best.
Unfotunately he plays behind a weaker pack than that of NZ and SA. It would be great to see him play for the Baaabaaas!

 

[King_D'Arcy]

I saw Quade Cooper place kicking the other day and all I could think of was Popeye

 

[smartcooky]

Savage

I was simply paraphrasing something that a famous US College football coach once said, I think was either Joe Paterno or Nick Saban.

"It was a good win alright, but it don't mean Jack if we don't win on Sunday. We are only as good as our next performance"

The substitution of "next "for "last" was a clever bit of deliberate misquoting of a common phrase, done for effect.

I actually read the whole thread before replying, and I stand by what I said. Pointing to websites that show who's got what trophies and who hasn't is mere chest beating. Arguing this player is better than that player because of some obscure statistics about which players were playing when 'X' number of tries were scored is pointless. Firstly posters will tend to back their own players, and secondly, it is not always possible to compare players because they offer different skill sets that may or may not fit in with what a team is trying to achieve. You could have a very right-handed fly-half who is really great at kicking pinpoint bombs but cannot pass to his right for peanuts. If your game is based on a ten-man kick and chase game, then he'll fit right in, but if you want to play the running/passing game, he'll be worse than useless to you.

Those are just my thoughts on the matter

 

[SavageLez]

I saw Quade Cooper place kicking the other day and all I could think of was Popeye

lol!!!!!!!!

 

[Jer1cho]

This argument is getting really old. Why the hell is every f*cking thread turning into 'This is why SA is better than NZ'? The Tri-Nations has not even started! Sure, our provincial sides are better than both New Zealand's and Australia's, but really guys. International rugby is a different kettle of fish. Any bloody team in the 'big league' can beat another if they are 100% on their game. France have beaten us way more in the last couple of years, but now that we have beaten them at the end of the season, on our home soil, does that mean we are all of a sudden way better than France?

Get real SavageLez. We had a great season last year, and won everything. Then we lost to both France and Ireland, so i guess then Ireland must be better than us?

International rugby is up and down. If it's your day, then you win. It doesn't mean you are better than any other team out there. England scraped a win over Australia thanks to Matt Gitteu proving to the world why you need a quality goal kicker. Does that mean England are better than Australia? No. The general consensus is that any team can win if the bounce of the ball goes their way.

How can you say we are currently the best team in the world when New Zealand are rightfully ranked number one, and we have not even played them yet? Take off the goggles. It's embarrassing those of us who actually don't have a bias.

 

[smartcooky]

This argument is getting really old. Why the hell is every f*cking thread turning into 'This is why SA is better than NZ'? The Tri-Nations has not even started! Sure, our provincial sides are better than both New Zealand's and Australia's, but really guys. International rugby is a different kettle of fish. Any bloody team in the 'big league' can beat another if they are 100% on their game. France have beaten us way more in the last couple of years, but now that we have beaten them at the end of the season, on our home soil, does that mean we are all of a sudden way better than France?

Get real SavageLez. We had a great season last year, and won everything. Then we lost to both France and Ireland, so i guess then Ireland must be better than us?

International rugby is up and down. If it's your day, then you win. It doesn't mean you are better than any other team out there. England scraped a win over Australia thanks to Matt Gitteu proving to the world why you need a quality goal kicker. Does that mean England are better than Australia? No. The general consensus is that any team can win if the bounce of the ball goes their way.

How can you say we are currently the best team in the world when New Zealand are rightfully ranked number one, and we have not even played them yet? Take off the goggles. It's embarrassing those of us who actually don't have a bias.

................................

 

[Seaton]

Get real SavageLez. We had a great season last year, and won everything. Then we lost to both France and Ireland, so i guess then Ireland must be better than us?
.

And seeing as Scotland beat Ireland, that means Scotland are better than SA
But wait, France also beat Ireland, so they must be better than them, but then lost to SA :huh:
Somehow something doesn't add up...

 

[Jer1cho]

Precisely my point. If we were the be-all and end-all of rugby, we would have beaten both France and Ireland last year. The truth is, there are kinks in our armor every now and then. We are far from invincible, and so is everyone else. Why is it so hard for certain members to stop gloating and trying to prove a point about, our team is the best EVAR!? It's making me sick to my stomach that this horse-**** is coming from fellow South Africans.

Have any of you wondered why, when other countries play us, they actually think they are in with a shot. But when they play New Zealand, they are hoping to lose valiantly, or have a respectable scoreline? The fact is, beating New Zealand is the ultimate. Always has been. Beating South Africa in certain cases, is often a reality. Sugar coat that all you want, but the point is, we are ONE OF THE BEST rugby playing countries on the planet. But, we also have the potential to be horse **** on certain days.

 

[SavageLez]

Precisely my point. If we were the be-all and end-all of rugby, we would have beaten both France and Ireland last year. The truth is, there are kinks in our armor every now and then. We are far from invincible, and so is everyone else. Why is it so hard for certain members to stop gloating and trying to prove a point about, our team is the best EVAR!? It's making me sick to my stomach that this horse-**** is coming from fellow South Africans.

Have any of you wondered why, when other countries play us, they actually think they are in with a shot. But when they play New Zealand, they are hoping to lose valiantly, or have a respectable scoreline? The fact is, beating New Zealand is the ultimate. Always has been. Beating South Africa in certain cases, is often a reality. Sugar coat that all you want, but the point is, we are ONE OF THE BEST rugby playing countries on the planet. But, we also have the potential to be horse **** on certain days.

Who sha.. on your battery . You clearly just want to argue! It is not ok for me to state my views and opinions based on facts but you can yours. Please pi.... off and don't reply to my threads.

I did not say we are invincible you a... and neither is NZ by the way. I agree with some of your statements because I feel the same way. The top 5 nations can beat each other on any given day depending on circumstances. Get back to the start mate: WE ARE TRYING TO RATE THE TOP TEAMS AND PLAYERS FOR THE RUGBY 2012 GAME YOU FREAK!

The only way that is possible for HB Studios to do is for people like us to state what they think the rating should be and why? That is what I and many other people have done on here. Your pathetici outcry is ludicrous. Please don't read my threads in future and don't reply either!!!!!