Gnostic's Wk 9 Wallabies

[Scarfman]

JB - what is the difference between the "form Wallaby side" and the "form SupeRugby side"?

It can only be that you are averaging out the players' performances over several weeks or possibly years. Is it the best players that week? Or the best players so far in the season? Or the players you would pick for the Wallabies today (taking everything into account). If it's the last option, then this list should hardly ever change, which makes doing it weekly quite silly.

 

[cyclopath]

Scarfy, the fact that Gnostic's list changes weekly implies he means the team of the form Super rugby players for the week, I guess. So really, pretty much what gets trotted out on rugbyheaven and other places.
The thread title might need some finessing.

 

[Gnostic]

I didn't know I was so confusing. Contrary, obnoxious, arrogant, yes, confusing well I had no idea.

I started doing this simply in response to the rubbish we see from our most learned Jounralists at the SMH and Australian who like to pick a form side each week. They then collate these at the end of the year and produce a FORM team. The fact that so many of their picks as FORM players are based on such abstract thought processes mere under educated mortals such as myself are unable to comprehend them inspired me to do a similar weekly list. So to put you all out of you misery my rules are basic:-

1. Players must be Oz elligible
2. Players have to play in the position they are selected in the side (the exception ebing the bench which traditionally has a number of utility players and can be heavily influenced by factors such as 5:2 split.
3. Week to week form as indicated by the title WK X Wallabies will determine who on a given week gets selected. AT the conclusion of the General Rounds a form team can be selected as 3 Oz teams will miss out.

Cyclo top marks for Comprehension but how dare you say I lack finesse. Do I have to add this to my list of good qualities as well?

 

[Scarfman]

Cheers Gnostic. Just to confirm, then, this is a player-of-the-round in each position, up to 22, with no reference whatsoever to your opinion about whether they would reproduce that form at international level, or what the backline combinations might look like, or if it's a good mix of loose forwards, and so on. It is a replica of the SMH pick-a-Tah list.

OK?

 

[Scarfman]

P.S. If I was in charge, I would remove the word Gnostic from the title, but graciously allow him to start the thread each week, like Reg does with the G&GR Wallaby player of the year. This is a good idea, but need tightening up a touch.

P.P.S. Yes, I'm in a terrifically bad mood today. What're'ya gonna do about it? :angryfire:

 

[DPK]

P.P.S. Yes, I'm in a terrifically bad mood today. What're'ya gonna do about it? :angryfire:

Troll mercilessly.

 

[cyclopath]

P.S. If I was in charge, I would remove the word Gnostic from the title, but graciously allow him to start the thread each week, like Reg does with the G&GR Wallaby player of the year. This is a good idea, but need tightening up a touch.

P.P.S. Yes, I'm in a terrifically bad mood today. What're'ya gonna do about it? :angryfire:

Point 1 - sounds like finessing.
Point 2 - avoid the Konze technique, and on balance, avoid annoying you until normal hormonal cycling returns! Or the Scarf gets loosened.

 

[Gnostic]

Ok Scarfie. I put by signature on it as I am quite happy to claim it and not have any of the auspicous members of GAGR sullied by my contraian views. I am happy to present a "Weekly form team list" unlike the SMH list it will actually be a form list. Combination is important and does get consideration in my picks but not at the expense of real form.

As for you having the shits today, take something for it and have a little lie down. Its not very dignified to whine about it like a little girl. ;-) .

 

[Scarfman]

Gnostic - I just about the rules back on track and then you posted your nonsense about "combinations" and "real form."

 

[Gnostic]

It adds to my charm

The combinations qualifier goes something like - When picking your best backrow you have to consider the balance of the backrow, If you have Kimlin at 6 and a choice between Mowen and Vaea at 8 I would be inclined to pick Vaea in the run on and Mowen on the Bench. However if Brown has outplayed Kimlin and deserves the 6 spot you have to pick Mowen at 8 to give that 3rd lineout option (I know some people would say Brown is a lineout option but he isn't anywhere near the Class of Mowen or Kimlin in that department). Real form qualifier is just that, FORM, not reputation or potential indicated from previous games. Real form in that round only.

I hope this helps Scarfie. Hows the bile level now. Maybe some Metamucil would help (along the lines of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBMsPNI6EZE )