Re: top 100 players
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 7:18 am
Age caught up with him.Beasties wrote:Just on the subject of Furlong v Sinck wtf's happened to Owen Franks? Gone from best in the world a couple of years ago to nowhere.
Age caught up with him.Beasties wrote:Just on the subject of Furlong v Sinck wtf's happened to Owen Franks? Gone from best in the world a couple of years ago to nowhere.
Nothing fairy bout ALB or CrottyDigby wrote:SBW is an odd one, a brilliant individual player, akin to Folau in a different role, but all over the place with his teamwork, positioning and decision making. ALB is okay, but nothing special. And critically neither SBW or ALB is an acronymBanquo wrote:ALB and SBW are not only good acronyms but also excellent 12's. Crotty is a bit glass jawed but is an excellent 12 and 13, though somewhat under-rated outside NZ.Digby wrote:I don't know NZ have any much better options than Farrell at 12, maybe Crotty if his head wasn't made of paper mâché, Crotty has better decision making but doesn't have the same passing game.
Also on Farrell, he's rated by a huge number of players across the game, so it's possible we're quite wrong in our preference for not picking him
The Faz mystery continues; he's become a reasonably solid international player, but that's it. And his passing left to right if its any more than 3 yards is still poor, I don't think he even tries a long pass that way any more. Maybe I'm just picky.
And yes there are problems with Farrell's passing, but none of the Kiwi options at 12 could fairy be described as better, one might argue with Crotty in particular he has better decision making around the shorter passes, but none of them are close to Faz's wider passing game, and Faz has much faster distribution albeit a little haphazard, especially as noted off his left (though I still recall his fling off the right 5m behind Mike Brown in Dublin with a certain fondness)
I'd rather Mako for longer...Oakboy wrote:I'd agree that Mako is the best LH overall but I would still start with Marler who rarely gets a mention in 'world class' debates. Marler for 50 minutes followed by Mako for 30 is more destructive of the opposition than playing them the other way around, IMO. Both would be in my World XXIII.
Just in terms of talent and match-winning ability, if Manu puts 10 decent games together at full fitness, there aren't many more effective 13s in the world.Puja wrote:Who would you have in the centres? It's not a strong position globally.Timbo wrote:I don’t think Fofana or Ringrose should be anywhere near a world XV right now, personally.
Puja
We can temper that some, with:Renniks wrote:Do we have to give EJ some credit for helping to turn players who are there or there abouts into world class players?
3 years ago I'm not sure I'd have said that Mako was best 1 in the world,
Sinck one of the best 3,
May one of the best wingers,
or George one of the best hookers
(And other than Billy, probably no-one else that would have made that list)
And now we're suggesting we could have as many as 5 players who would make a starting world XV, and probably as high as 7 or 8 if we looked at top 30 in the world (two teams)
Alan Wyn Jones can play....but he is not top draw....the Welsh have built him up into an icon so they can sing songs about him...isnt it.Mikey Brown wrote:I have no idea why you'd do that but okay.
Not too sure about that logic. He is worth a top 25 slot at least on his kicking.Oakboy wrote:How can opinion vary so much? IMO, Farrell cannot be in the top 45 players on the grounds that he would not get into the top three teams selected from world rugby.
You know...Mako is getting so built up these days. There is no question in old fashioned terms he is brilliant about the park. I am not sure he has ever been the absolutely dominant scrummager you should be to classed as the worlds best loosehead.Oakboy wrote:I'd agree that Mako is the best LH overall but I would still start with Marler who rarely gets a mention in 'world class' debates. Marler for 50 minutes followed by Mako for 30 is more destructive of the opposition than playing them the other way around, IMO. Both would be in my World XXIII.
What if his kicking %age is safely...well poor.richy678 wrote:Not too sure about that logic. He is worth a top 25 slot at least on his kicking.Oakboy wrote:How can opinion vary so much? IMO, Farrell cannot be in the top 45 players on the grounds that he would not get into the top three teams selected from world rugby.
Anyway..how do you compare a player in a first team of weak resources to brilliant 3rd choice player in a blessed team?
I will obviously give way to the cold stats, however - as an observer who can see Faz's limitations - not least his "tackling technique" - he is better than 46th best player in the world.Stom wrote:What if his kicking %age is safely...well poor.richy678 wrote:Not too sure about that logic. He is worth a top 25 slot at least on his kicking.Oakboy wrote:How can opinion vary so much? IMO, Farrell cannot be in the top 45 players on the grounds that he would not get into the top three teams selected from world rugby.
Anyway..how do you compare a player in a first team of weak resources to brilliant 3rd choice player in a blessed team?
It's actually worse than 6...Welsh kickers.
Yes, 6 Welsh kickers, not 6 WORLD kickers.
He is not an iceman, he is an average international kicker. He's on a par with Finn Russell, ffs. He's not on a par with Sexton or Laidlaw (though it's hard to beat Laidlaw when he turns down every kick that's remotely difficult) or Halfpenny or Biggar. He's marginally better than Foley or Barrett...
Why does he deserve a slot in the top players?richy678 wrote:I will obviously give way to the cold stats, however - as an observer who can see Faz's limitations - not least his "tackling technique" - he is better than 46th best player in the world.Stom wrote:What if his kicking %age is safely...well poor.richy678 wrote:
Not too sure about that logic. He is worth a top 25 slot at least on his kicking.
Anyway..how do you compare a player in a first team of weak resources to brilliant 3rd choice player in a blessed team?
It's actually worse than 6...Welsh kickers.
Yes, 6 Welsh kickers, not 6 WORLD kickers.
He is not an iceman, he is an average international kicker. He's on a par with Finn Russell, ffs. He's not on a par with Sexton or Laidlaw (though it's hard to beat Laidlaw when he turns down every kick that's remotely difficult) or Halfpenny or Biggar. He's marginally better than Foley or Barrett...
He cops flack on here, I know, as everyone likes the silky old fashioned standoff skills of Ford, and Cips is (figuratively) lusted after. Faz does deserve better than 46th in the world though, purely as a rugby player.
It does sound harsh to say he's 46th in the world at best, but think about it this way - where is he in the fly-half rankings? Below Barrett and Mo'unga, provably behind Ford, definitely behind Sexton. And I don't know he'd fare any better in the 12 rankings.richy678 wrote:I will obviously give way to the cold stats, however - as an observer who can see Faz's limitations - not least his "tackling technique" - he is better than 46th best player in the world.Stom wrote:What if his kicking %age is safely...well poor.richy678 wrote:
Not too sure about that logic. He is worth a top 25 slot at least on his kicking.
Anyway..how do you compare a player in a first team of weak resources to brilliant 3rd choice player in a blessed team?
It's actually worse than 6...Welsh kickers.
Yes, 6 Welsh kickers, not 6 WORLD kickers.
He is not an iceman, he is an average international kicker. He's on a par with Finn Russell, ffs. He's not on a par with Sexton or Laidlaw (though it's hard to beat Laidlaw when he turns down every kick that's remotely difficult) or Halfpenny or Biggar. He's marginally better than Foley or Barrett...
He cops flack on here, I know, as everyone likes the silky old fashioned standoff skills of Ford, and Cips is (figuratively) lusted after. Faz does deserve better than 46th in the world though, purely as a rugby player.
Really? How come? You'd genuinely expect that, if Farrell were a Kiwi, New Zealand would pick him ahead of Mo'unga?Digby wrote:He cannot be behind Mo'unga. It'd be quite reasonable to think Mo'unga will go on to (easily) surpass Farrell, but he's not done so yet.
He's not ahead of actual games played so far. And actually for delivery in the next few weeks yes I do think they'd pick Farrell ahead of Mo'unga, but heading into the next WC again I'd expect they'd pick Mo'unga. Farrell does have a lot of positives, he's just not as good as Ford, but I don't overlook he's on 70 odd caps and Mo'unga is on 7 or soPuja wrote:Really? How come? You'd genuinely expect that, if Farrell were a Kiwi, New Zealand would pick him ahead of Mo'unga?Digby wrote:He cannot be behind Mo'unga. It'd be quite reasonable to think Mo'unga will go on to (easily) surpass Farrell, but he's not done so yet.
Puja
For once I actually agree with Digby, you can't pick Mo'unga ahead of Farrell. Yet.Digby wrote:He's not ahead of actual games played so far. And actually for delivery in the next few weeks yes I do think they'd pick Farrell ahead of Mo'unga, but heading into the next WC again I'd expect they'd pick Mo'unga. Farrell does have a lot of positives, he's just not as good as Ford, but I don't overlook he's on 70 odd caps and Mo'unga is on 7 or soPuja wrote:Really? How come? You'd genuinely expect that, if Farrell were a Kiwi, New Zealand would pick him ahead of Mo'unga?Digby wrote:He cannot be behind Mo'unga. It'd be quite reasonable to think Mo'unga will go on to (easily) surpass Farrell, but he's not done so yet.
Puja
Stom wrote:Why does he deserve a slot in the top players?richy678 wrote:I will obviously give way to the cold stats, however - as an observer who can see Faz's limitations - not least his "tackling technique" - he is better than 46th best player in the world.Stom wrote:
What if his kicking %age is safely...well poor.
It's actually worse than 6...Welsh kickers.
Yes, 6 Welsh kickers, not 6 WORLD kickers.
He is not an iceman, he is an average international kicker. He's on a par with Finn Russell, ffs. He's not on a par with Sexton or Laidlaw (though it's hard to beat Laidlaw when he turns down every kick that's remotely difficult) or Halfpenny or Biggar. He's marginally better than Foley or Barrett...
He cops flack on here, I know, as everyone likes the silky old fashioned standoff skills of Ford, and Cips is (figuratively) lusted after. Faz does deserve better than 46th in the world though, purely as a rugby player.
I'm not questioning the fact he has an impact, but he's never one of the top 25 players in World Rugby. And if you're saying he's in the top 45...you're saying he's better than many other players who could also argue they deserve a spot.
Puja wrote:Really? How come? You'd genuinely expect that, if Farrell were a Kiwi, New Zealand would pick him ahead of Mo'unga?Digby wrote:He cannot be behind Mo'unga. It'd be quite reasonable to think Mo'unga will go on to (easily) surpass Farrell, but he's not done so yet.
Puja
I'm going to have to disagree he'd be in the 45.richy678 wrote:Stom wrote:Why does he deserve a slot in the top players?richy678 wrote:
I will obviously give way to the cold stats, however - as an observer who can see Faz's limitations - not least his "tackling technique" - he is better than 46th best player in the world.
He cops flack on here, I know, as everyone likes the silky old fashioned standoff skills of Ford, and Cips is (figuratively) lusted after. Faz does deserve better than 46th in the world though, purely as a rugby player.
I'm not questioning the fact he has an impact, but he's never one of the top 25 players in World Rugby. And if you're saying he's in the top 45...you're saying he's better than many other players who could also argue they deserve a spot.
I think your trying to attach too much sentiment to the word "deserve" here. I am not claiming Faz has a birth rite or we owe him something. I just believe saying he is not in the top 45 players is doing him a disservice.
Once again - I am not his biggest fan, but in this melding of the 15 recognised positions, to award a grade position on the bell curve - he would be in the top 45.