J
Jer1cho
Guest
OMG Jerry Collins joined the forums!
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
F
feicarsinn
Guest
I will give a mod +10 rep to change his name to that.
S
shazbooger
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fushitsusha @ Sep 30 2009, 03:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
100% agreed.
100% agreed.
S
stormer2010
Guest
From a SA point of view, what I don't understand is how Smit can be the only Bok on the list if he got shoved to tighthead because Bismarck is in fact a better player but then Os du Randt, Joost van der Westhuizen, Fourie du Preez, Bryan Habana and Victor Matfield can't manage it in popular opinion. These are some of the most complete players to have played the game and I think du Preez, Matfield and Habana suffer from still playing and thus not having 'mythical' status. Yet.
Also think some Aussie legends are unlucky not to make that list; Latham, Roff, Horan and Larkham should at least get a mention.
Remove Smit and Gregan and add Wood and du Preez. Aussies can have Eales on the list.
That said, the competition is hot but I believe our scrummies at least are hotter than Gregan.
Also think some Aussie legends are unlucky not to make that list; Latham, Roff, Horan and Larkham should at least get a mention.
Remove Smit and Gregan and add Wood and du Preez. Aussies can have Eales on the list.
That said, the competition is hot but I believe our scrummies at least are hotter than Gregan.
G
gingergenius
Guest
Who was the person who brought Neil Back into the argument incidentally? McCaw was/is a better player than any 7 ever.
S
shtove
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Randwick Kingfisher @ Oct 1 2009, 01:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Aus 99 were the greatest. Not ABs 95 or England 03.
:lol: We're just having our summer here. July was all umbrellas and wellingtons.
Aus 99 were the greatest. Not ABs 95 or England 03.
N
Nickdnz
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Randwick Kingfisher @ Oct 1 2009, 01:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Calm down gingergenius were all here to share our views on rugby. You obviously like Hill and Back I like them too but I see them inferior to Collins and McCaw and vice versa, nothing wrong with our opinions cos they're honest. Nothing to get angry about its a mere opinion lol.
Yes I do remember now, Hill and Back worked hard in those two 2003 tests along with Wilkinson to put together Englands 2 wins against us 15-13 and 31-28 were the scores. For a northren hemisphere side to beat us back to back is out of the norm (there may be a few others but cant think of one at the moment) and so that was an achievement.
Hill and Back are good but I like Collins and McCaw (honestly these guys WIN A LOT).
In 2003 Hill and Back won 2 games against the All Blacks and brought Englands telly of victories against us to 6. Yes 6, ever since England invented rugby they've managed to beat us 6 times after all these years. FACT.
[/b][/quote]
I've read this argument and it is a bit tiresom coming on these forums, and see people spit abuse over others opinions. All right, you believe one player is better then the other. In the case of Collins verse Hill, people from New Zealand like Collins because they have been exposed to him playing more often then Richard Hill, and visa versa for Richard Hill. Both are great players but it seems that there can only be one right anwser to an OPINION based topic. I like arguing, but why is it everytime I come on this forum and I make a statment, I get abuse spit at me from usually ignorent and sad to say - British fans, who no matter how diplomatic you try to get your points of view accross, it becomes unexceptable. Some of the name suggestions of players names I disagree with whole heartedly, but no need for name calling. Sorry for the british remark, it is just an observation, but while I don't think these forums should become a totally deprived of a good argument, it is a bit disapointing when some don't want to voice their opinions because of others. Anyway that is my little rant, sorry for the time waster.
By the way Randwick, what do you meant when "you" played Hill and Collins, out of curiosity?
Calm down gingergenius were all here to share our views on rugby. You obviously like Hill and Back I like them too but I see them inferior to Collins and McCaw and vice versa, nothing wrong with our opinions cos they're honest. Nothing to get angry about its a mere opinion lol.
Yes I do remember now, Hill and Back worked hard in those two 2003 tests along with Wilkinson to put together Englands 2 wins against us 15-13 and 31-28 were the scores. For a northren hemisphere side to beat us back to back is out of the norm (there may be a few others but cant think of one at the moment) and so that was an achievement.
Hill and Back are good but I like Collins and McCaw (honestly these guys WIN A LOT).
In 2003 Hill and Back won 2 games against the All Blacks and brought Englands telly of victories against us to 6. Yes 6, ever since England invented rugby they've managed to beat us 6 times after all these years. FACT.
[/b][/quote]
I've read this argument and it is a bit tiresom coming on these forums, and see people spit abuse over others opinions. All right, you believe one player is better then the other. In the case of Collins verse Hill, people from New Zealand like Collins because they have been exposed to him playing more often then Richard Hill, and visa versa for Richard Hill. Both are great players but it seems that there can only be one right anwser to an OPINION based topic. I like arguing, but why is it everytime I come on this forum and I make a statment, I get abuse spit at me from usually ignorent and sad to say - British fans, who no matter how diplomatic you try to get your points of view accross, it becomes unexceptable. Some of the name suggestions of players names I disagree with whole heartedly, but no need for name calling. Sorry for the british remark, it is just an observation, but while I don't think these forums should become a totally deprived of a good argument, it is a bit disapointing when some don't want to voice their opinions because of others. Anyway that is my little rant, sorry for the time waster.
By the way Randwick, what do you meant when "you" played Hill and Collins, out of curiosity?
S
stormer2010
Guest
How about a poll for each position? Maybe too tedious but that should give a clear indication of the majority opinion and were opinion is split?
I nominate
Os du Randt /
Keith Wood / John Smit / Ibanez
Hayman /
Johnn Eales /
Martin Johnson / Victor Matfield
Richard Hill /
Richie McCaw /
Zinzan if eligible / Dallaglio
vd Westhuizen / Gregan / du Preez / Pichot
Carter / Wilkonson / Larkham
Habana / Lomu / Roff / Caucau / Wilson / Williams
Horan /
O'Drivoll / Umaga
Habana / Lomu / Roff / Caucau / Wilson / Williams
Cullen / Latham
I nominate
Os du Randt /
Keith Wood / John Smit / Ibanez
Hayman /
Johnn Eales /
Martin Johnson / Victor Matfield
Richard Hill /
Richie McCaw /
Zinzan if eligible / Dallaglio
vd Westhuizen / Gregan / du Preez / Pichot
Carter / Wilkonson / Larkham
Habana / Lomu / Roff / Caucau / Wilson / Williams
Horan /
O'Drivoll / Umaga
Habana / Lomu / Roff / Caucau / Wilson / Williams
Cullen / Latham
N
Ngapuhi
Guest
HAHAHAHAHa Gavin Henson. Is that the same guy Dan Carter swatted off like a fly when the Lions came to New Zealand?? HaHAHAHAHa
Ok heres my team.
15. C Cullen
14. B Habana
13. B O'Driscoll
12. T Horan
11. R Caucaunibuca
10. J Wilkinson
9. A Pichot
8. Z Brooke
7. R McCaw
6. M Jones
5. M Johnson c
4. J Eales
3. C Hayman
2. K Woods
1. O Du Randt
Reserves: T Umaga, D Carter, F Du Preez, L Dallaglio, V Matfield, C Dowd, Fitzpatrick and Gavin Henson hahahaha
Ok heres my team.
15. C Cullen
14. B Habana
13. B O'Driscoll
12. T Horan
11. R Caucaunibuca
10. J Wilkinson
9. A Pichot
8. Z Brooke
7. R McCaw
6. M Jones
5. M Johnson c
4. J Eales
3. C Hayman
2. K Woods
1. O Du Randt
Reserves: T Umaga, D Carter, F Du Preez, L Dallaglio, V Matfield, C Dowd, Fitzpatrick and Gavin Henson hahahaha
N
Ngapuhi
Guest
Tony Woodcock ate him alive every time
D
dullonien
Guest
Not sure where that came from Ngapuhi! I can't see how anyone can leave out Lomu from their team. Caucau was very good for what, 2 seasons? He then got fat and basically f**ked around. By that recogning Henson might have a chance........ (I'm being sarcastic if you can't tell). On the other hand, Lomu was just phenominal for quite a few years. Yes his career was cut short by illness, but there has never been a player like him, and I wouldn't be surprised if there ever will be. Caucau could have been, but couldn't be arsed.
Mine would be:
01 Os du Randt (Gethin Jenkins could be up there, maybe when his career is over though, he's probably the most complete prop ever!)
02 Keith Wood
03 Hayman
04 John Eals
05 Martin Johnson
06 Richard Hill (if Collins was still playing like he was a few years back, maybe, but he's not)
07 Richie McCaw
08 Zinzan
09 vd Westhuizen
10 Dan Carter (not a fan of Wilkinson. Again not good enough for long enough)
11 Jonah Lomu
12 Tim Horan
13 Brian O'Driscoll
14 Ieian Evans (had to get one Welsh player in lol. He was a world class player playing in a rubbish Welsh team)
15 Cullen
Mine would be:
01 Os du Randt (Gethin Jenkins could be up there, maybe when his career is over though, he's probably the most complete prop ever!)
02 Keith Wood
03 Hayman
04 John Eals
05 Martin Johnson
06 Richard Hill (if Collins was still playing like he was a few years back, maybe, but he's not)
07 Richie McCaw
08 Zinzan
09 vd Westhuizen
10 Dan Carter (not a fan of Wilkinson. Again not good enough for long enough)
11 Jonah Lomu
12 Tim Horan
13 Brian O'Driscoll
14 Ieian Evans (had to get one Welsh player in lol. He was a world class player playing in a rubbish Welsh team)
15 Cullen
D
DuncTheDoodle
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dullonien @ Oct 1 2009, 04:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Evans over Shane Williams?
And I agree about Gethin Jenkins. As far as props go, is there anything he can't do? (Paul ***o once said he was a fantastic goalkicker, as well.)
Evans over Shane Williams?
And I agree about Gethin Jenkins. As far as props go, is there anything he can't do? (Paul ***o once said he was a fantastic goalkicker, as well.)
D
dullonien
Guest
Ah to be honest, I'd put Habana or Wilson there. I love Shane Williams, have done since a youngish age, but there have been better. Thought I'd put another name forward, as Evans was a class act, didn't score enough tries though to probably be considered. If that was his fault or the fact he was playing in one of the worst Welsh teams of all time, I don't know.
From a Welsh persective searching my brains for some names worthy of mentioning in this thread, not enough come to mind. Mybe if so many didn't go to league, there'd be more. The likes of Alan Bateman, Jonathan Davies and Scott Gibbs were class. Rob Howley is also up there as far as scrum halves go.
From a Welsh persective searching my brains for some names worthy of mentioning in this thread, not enough come to mind. Mybe if so many didn't go to league, there'd be more. The likes of Alan Bateman, Jonathan Davies and Scott Gibbs were class. Rob Howley is also up there as far as scrum halves go.
R
Randwick Kingfisher
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nickdnz @ Oct 1 2009, 03:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Calm down gingergenius were all here to share our views on rugby. You obviously like Hill and Back I like them too but I see them inferior to Collins and McCaw and vice versa, nothing wrong with our opinions cos they're honest. Nothing to get angry about its a mere opinion lol.
Yes I do remember now, Hill and Back worked hard in those two 2003 tests along with Wilkinson to put together Englands 2 wins against us 15-13 and 31-28 were the scores. For a northren hemisphere side to beat us back to back is out of the norm (there may be a few others but cant think of one at the moment) and so that was an achievement.
Hill and Back are good but I like Collins and McCaw (honestly these guys WIN A LOT).
In 2003 Hill and Back won 2 games against the All Blacks and brought Englands telly of victories against us to 6. Yes 6, ever since England invented rugby they've managed to beat us 6 times after all these years. FACT.
[/b][/quote]
I've read this argument and it is a bit tiresom coming on these forums, and see people spit abuse over others opinions. All right, you believe one player is better then the other. In the case of Collins verse Hill, people from New Zealand like Collins because they have been exposed to him playing more often then Richard Hill, and visa versa for Richard Hill. Both are great players but it seems that there can only be one right anwser to an OPINION based topic. I like arguing, but why is it everytime I come on this forum and I make a statment, I get abuse spit at me from usually ignorent and sad to say - British fans, who no matter how diplomatic you try to get your points of view accross, it becomes unexceptable. Some of the name suggestions of players names I disagree with whole heartedly, but no need for name calling. Sorry for the british remark, it is just an observation, but while I don't think these forums should become a totally deprived of a good argument, it is a bit disapointing when some don't want to voice their opinions because of others. Anyway that is my little rant, sorry for the time waster.
By the way Randwick, what do you meant when "you" played Hill and Collins, out of curiosity?
[/b][/quote]
I hate to boast (not the type but my arm was forced) and I never wanted to come on to a forum and give an opinion just to be called an idiot by gingergenius (who i think is british). However I have played professionally and shared the field with these 2 players and thats what caught my eye when I read this discussion about Collins, Hill and Back.
However I talked to my mates about this all and its a joke we were just cracking up thinking 'the poms on this forum are headstrong and they lack optimisim'.
I cant wait for the end of year tour of the northren hemisphere. Im guessing it'll be the same usual (that the rugby world is use to) NZ beating all of the north. Cant wait.
Calm down gingergenius were all here to share our views on rugby. You obviously like Hill and Back I like them too but I see them inferior to Collins and McCaw and vice versa, nothing wrong with our opinions cos they're honest. Nothing to get angry about its a mere opinion lol.
Yes I do remember now, Hill and Back worked hard in those two 2003 tests along with Wilkinson to put together Englands 2 wins against us 15-13 and 31-28 were the scores. For a northren hemisphere side to beat us back to back is out of the norm (there may be a few others but cant think of one at the moment) and so that was an achievement.
Hill and Back are good but I like Collins and McCaw (honestly these guys WIN A LOT).
In 2003 Hill and Back won 2 games against the All Blacks and brought Englands telly of victories against us to 6. Yes 6, ever since England invented rugby they've managed to beat us 6 times after all these years. FACT.
[/b][/quote]
I've read this argument and it is a bit tiresom coming on these forums, and see people spit abuse over others opinions. All right, you believe one player is better then the other. In the case of Collins verse Hill, people from New Zealand like Collins because they have been exposed to him playing more often then Richard Hill, and visa versa for Richard Hill. Both are great players but it seems that there can only be one right anwser to an OPINION based topic. I like arguing, but why is it everytime I come on this forum and I make a statment, I get abuse spit at me from usually ignorent and sad to say - British fans, who no matter how diplomatic you try to get your points of view accross, it becomes unexceptable. Some of the name suggestions of players names I disagree with whole heartedly, but no need for name calling. Sorry for the british remark, it is just an observation, but while I don't think these forums should become a totally deprived of a good argument, it is a bit disapointing when some don't want to voice their opinions because of others. Anyway that is my little rant, sorry for the time waster.
By the way Randwick, what do you meant when "you" played Hill and Collins, out of curiosity?
[/b][/quote]
I hate to boast (not the type but my arm was forced) and I never wanted to come on to a forum and give an opinion just to be called an idiot by gingergenius (who i think is british). However I have played professionally and shared the field with these 2 players and thats what caught my eye when I read this discussion about Collins, Hill and Back.
However I talked to my mates about this all and its a joke we were just cracking up thinking 'the poms on this forum are headstrong and they lack optimisim'.
I cant wait for the end of year tour of the northren hemisphere. Im guessing it'll be the same usual (that the rugby world is use to) NZ beating all of the north. Cant wait.
S
Steve-o
Guest
This is brilliant! 
Here's my belated "welcome to the forum"
Here's my belated "welcome to the forum"
B
bristol-iain
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Randwick Kingfisher @ Oct 2 2009, 10:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Calm down gingergenius were all here to share our views on rugby. You obviously like Hill and Back I like them too but I see them inferior to Collins and McCaw and vice versa, nothing wrong with our opinions cos they're honest. Nothing to get angry about its a mere opinion lol.
Yes I do remember now, Hill and Back worked hard in those two 2003 tests along with Wilkinson to put together Englands 2 wins against us 15-13 and 31-28 were the scores. For a northren hemisphere side to beat us back to back is out of the norm (there may be a few others but cant think of one at the moment) and so that was an achievement.
Hill and Back are good but I like Collins and McCaw (honestly these guys WIN A LOT).
In 2003 Hill and Back won 2 games against the All Blacks and brought Englands telly of victories against us to 6. Yes 6, ever since England invented rugby they've managed to beat us 6 times after all these years. FACT.
[/b][/quote]
I've read this argument and it is a bit tiresom coming on these forums, and see people spit abuse over others opinions. All right, you believe one player is better then the other. In the case of Collins verse Hill, people from New Zealand like Collins because they have been exposed to him playing more often then Richard Hill, and visa versa for Richard Hill. Both are great players but it seems that there can only be one right anwser to an OPINION based topic. I like arguing, but why is it everytime I come on this forum and I make a statment, I get abuse spit at me from usually ignorent and sad to say - British fans, who no matter how diplomatic you try to get your points of view accross, it becomes unexceptable. Some of the name suggestions of players names I disagree with whole heartedly, but no need for name calling. Sorry for the british remark, it is just an observation, but while I don't think these forums should become a totally deprived of a good argument, it is a bit disapointing when some don't want to voice their opinions because of others. Anyway that is my little rant, sorry for the time waster.
By the way Randwick, what do you meant when "you" played Hill and Collins, out of curiosity?
[/b][/quote]
I hate to boast (not the type but my arm was forced) and I never wanted to come on to a forum and give an opinion just to be called an idiot by gingergenius (who i think is british). However I have played professionally and shared the field with these 2 players and thats what caught my eye when I read this discussion about Collins, Hill and Back.
However I talked to my mates about this all and its a joke we were just cracking up thinking 'the poms on this forum are headstrong and they lack optimisim'.
I cant wait for the end of year tour of the northren hemisphere. Im guessing it'll be the same usual (that the rugby world is use to) NZ beating all of the north. Cant wait.
[/b][/quote]
Oh, so you couldnt deduce that from the Union Jack on his details?
Calm down gingergenius were all here to share our views on rugby. You obviously like Hill and Back I like them too but I see them inferior to Collins and McCaw and vice versa, nothing wrong with our opinions cos they're honest. Nothing to get angry about its a mere opinion lol.
Yes I do remember now, Hill and Back worked hard in those two 2003 tests along with Wilkinson to put together Englands 2 wins against us 15-13 and 31-28 were the scores. For a northren hemisphere side to beat us back to back is out of the norm (there may be a few others but cant think of one at the moment) and so that was an achievement.
Hill and Back are good but I like Collins and McCaw (honestly these guys WIN A LOT).
In 2003 Hill and Back won 2 games against the All Blacks and brought Englands telly of victories against us to 6. Yes 6, ever since England invented rugby they've managed to beat us 6 times after all these years. FACT.
[/b][/quote]
I've read this argument and it is a bit tiresom coming on these forums, and see people spit abuse over others opinions. All right, you believe one player is better then the other. In the case of Collins verse Hill, people from New Zealand like Collins because they have been exposed to him playing more often then Richard Hill, and visa versa for Richard Hill. Both are great players but it seems that there can only be one right anwser to an OPINION based topic. I like arguing, but why is it everytime I come on this forum and I make a statment, I get abuse spit at me from usually ignorent and sad to say - British fans, who no matter how diplomatic you try to get your points of view accross, it becomes unexceptable. Some of the name suggestions of players names I disagree with whole heartedly, but no need for name calling. Sorry for the british remark, it is just an observation, but while I don't think these forums should become a totally deprived of a good argument, it is a bit disapointing when some don't want to voice their opinions because of others. Anyway that is my little rant, sorry for the time waster.
By the way Randwick, what do you meant when "you" played Hill and Collins, out of curiosity?
[/b][/quote]
I hate to boast (not the type but my arm was forced) and I never wanted to come on to a forum and give an opinion just to be called an idiot by gingergenius (who i think is british). However I have played professionally and shared the field with these 2 players and thats what caught my eye when I read this discussion about Collins, Hill and Back.
However I talked to my mates about this all and its a joke we were just cracking up thinking 'the poms on this forum are headstrong and they lack optimisim'.
I cant wait for the end of year tour of the northren hemisphere. Im guessing it'll be the same usual (that the rugby world is use to) NZ beating all of the north. Cant wait.
[/b][/quote]
Oh, so you couldnt deduce that from the Union Jack on his details?
N
Nickdnz
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bristol-iain @ Oct 2 2009, 11:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Calm down gingergenius were all here to share our views on rugby. You obviously like Hill and Back I like them too but I see them inferior to Collins and McCaw and vice versa, nothing wrong with our opinions cos they're honest. Nothing to get angry about its a mere opinion lol.
Yes I do remember now, Hill and Back worked hard in those two 2003 tests along with Wilkinson to put together Englands 2 wins against us 15-13 and 31-28 were the scores. For a northren hemisphere side to beat us back to back is out of the norm (there may be a few others but cant think of one at the moment) and so that was an achievement.
Hill and Back are good but I like Collins and McCaw (honestly these guys WIN A LOT).
In 2003 Hill and Back won 2 games against the All Blacks and brought Englands telly of victories against us to 6. Yes 6, ever since England invented rugby they've managed to beat us 6 times after all these years. FACT.
[/b][/quote]
I've read this argument and it is a bit tiresom coming on these forums, and see people spit abuse over others opinions. All right, you believe one player is better then the other. In the case of Collins verse Hill, people from New Zealand like Collins because they have been exposed to him playing more often then Richard Hill, and visa versa for Richard Hill. Both are great players but it seems that there can only be one right anwser to an OPINION based topic. I like arguing, but why is it everytime I come on this forum and I make a statment, I get abuse spit at me from usually ignorent and sad to say - British fans, who no matter how diplomatic you try to get your points of view accross, it becomes unexceptable. Some of the name suggestions of players names I disagree with whole heartedly, but no need for name calling. Sorry for the british remark, it is just an observation, but while I don't think these forums should become a totally deprived of a good argument, it is a bit disapointing when some don't want to voice their opinions because of others. Anyway that is my little rant, sorry for the time waster.
By the way Randwick, what do you meant when "you" played Hill and Collins, out of curiosity?
[/b][/quote]
I hate to boast (not the type but my arm was forced) and I never wanted to come on to a forum and give an opinion just to be called an idiot by gingergenius (who i think is british). However I have played professionally and shared the field with these 2 players and thats what caught my eye when I read this discussion about Collins, Hill and Back.
However I talked to my mates about this all and its a joke we were just cracking up thinking 'the poms on this forum are headstrong and they lack optimisim'.
I cant wait for the end of year tour of the northren hemisphere. Im guessing it'll be the same usual (that the rugby world is use to) NZ beating all of the north. Cant wait.
[/b][/quote]
Oh, so you couldnt deduce that from the Union Jack on his details?
[/b][/quote]
Lolz, funy call. Can I ask what your name is, how did you play both Collins and Hill?
Calm down gingergenius were all here to share our views on rugby. You obviously like Hill and Back I like them too but I see them inferior to Collins and McCaw and vice versa, nothing wrong with our opinions cos they're honest. Nothing to get angry about its a mere opinion lol.
Yes I do remember now, Hill and Back worked hard in those two 2003 tests along with Wilkinson to put together Englands 2 wins against us 15-13 and 31-28 were the scores. For a northren hemisphere side to beat us back to back is out of the norm (there may be a few others but cant think of one at the moment) and so that was an achievement.
Hill and Back are good but I like Collins and McCaw (honestly these guys WIN A LOT).
In 2003 Hill and Back won 2 games against the All Blacks and brought Englands telly of victories against us to 6. Yes 6, ever since England invented rugby they've managed to beat us 6 times after all these years. FACT.
[/b][/quote]
I've read this argument and it is a bit tiresom coming on these forums, and see people spit abuse over others opinions. All right, you believe one player is better then the other. In the case of Collins verse Hill, people from New Zealand like Collins because they have been exposed to him playing more often then Richard Hill, and visa versa for Richard Hill. Both are great players but it seems that there can only be one right anwser to an OPINION based topic. I like arguing, but why is it everytime I come on this forum and I make a statment, I get abuse spit at me from usually ignorent and sad to say - British fans, who no matter how diplomatic you try to get your points of view accross, it becomes unexceptable. Some of the name suggestions of players names I disagree with whole heartedly, but no need for name calling. Sorry for the british remark, it is just an observation, but while I don't think these forums should become a totally deprived of a good argument, it is a bit disapointing when some don't want to voice their opinions because of others. Anyway that is my little rant, sorry for the time waster.
By the way Randwick, what do you meant when "you" played Hill and Collins, out of curiosity?
[/b][/quote]
I hate to boast (not the type but my arm was forced) and I never wanted to come on to a forum and give an opinion just to be called an idiot by gingergenius (who i think is british). However I have played professionally and shared the field with these 2 players and thats what caught my eye when I read this discussion about Collins, Hill and Back.
However I talked to my mates about this all and its a joke we were just cracking up thinking 'the poms on this forum are headstrong and they lack optimisim'.
I cant wait for the end of year tour of the northren hemisphere. Im guessing it'll be the same usual (that the rugby world is use to) NZ beating all of the north. Cant wait.
[/b][/quote]
Oh, so you couldnt deduce that from the Union Jack on his details?
[/b][/quote]
Lolz, funy call. Can I ask what your name is, how did you play both Collins and Hill?
N
Ngapuhi
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dullonien @ Oct 1 2009, 03:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Yep definitely Rob Howley he hardly made a mistake and Wales also never had the greatest forward pack at the time as well. Most of the top halfbacks mentioned were behind very strong forward packs.
Yep definitely Rob Howley he hardly made a mistake and Wales also never had the greatest forward pack at the time as well. Most of the top halfbacks mentioned were behind very strong forward packs.
G
gingergenius
Guest
He's blatantly Marty Holah who would've played against Collins in NZ, and is soooooo bitter about getting raped by a one-legged Hill in THAT Heineken Cup match and bitter at playing in one of England's so few defeats of the All Blacks that his reason for being is to undermine God and England's reputation for all eternity.
D
dullonien
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ngapuhi @ Oct 2 2009, 01:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
That is quite true. If he was playing behind a dominant pack (instead of playing behind one with the likes of Derwyn Jones in it <_< ), he could have been the best of the pro era. But because he wasn't, it's impossible to say. So, yes he's up there, but the ones mentioned are ahead. Suppose Colin Charvis' name could be mentioned, has any other forward scored more tries than him?
Oh and this thread is already legendary after Randwick Kingfisher claiming to have played against Hill and Collins. How is anybody supposed to believe you if you don't offer some kind of proof?
That is quite true. If he was playing behind a dominant pack (instead of playing behind one with the likes of Derwyn Jones in it <_< ), he could have been the best of the pro era. But because he wasn't, it's impossible to say. So, yes he's up there, but the ones mentioned are ahead. Suppose Colin Charvis' name could be mentioned, has any other forward scored more tries than him?
Oh and this thread is already legendary after Randwick Kingfisher claiming to have played against Hill and Collins. How is anybody supposed to believe you if you don't offer some kind of proof?
Similar threads
