Reds 2019

[dru]

- but I personally do find it tiresome to read the same stuff over and over again when none of it is going to change the past

Yes good I understand. You might not have noticed the subtlety here but if this was, say, the Wallabies thread, I would go stum quickly.

As far as I’m concerned, on the Reds thread that onus lies with others. If they decide to continue then you can anticipate re-reading things. Personally I think it’s poor form, but that’s just me, and I’ve no intention of dropping it. On this thread.

 

[TSR]

Haha - don’t worry. I know it will go around again. I probably should have just let it go.

 

[Gnostic]

I think the broader problem Gnostic is also that we have fundamentally failed to establish the depth of player base which negates the need to cling on to particular players.



People can say what they like about league, but by the time the latest ‘Greatest player of all time’ retires or moves on, be

they Thurston, Lockyer, Smith, Slater or whomever, someone else has already, if not taken the mantel, at least put themselves in the frame to challenge for it. The out and out stars do still command special attention, but if terms cannot be met then league as a whole moves on, even if certain clubs go back to the pack for a while.



Unfortunately I feel that the code is now caught in an impossible corner where it can’t afford to go back to the start, but nor am I confident that it can afford not to. Instead the powers that be are inclined to pick favourites and then ride them to the finish come

hell or high water (unless, of course, you threaten the viability of the games remaining income streams).



It is one of the reasons (but only one) that I am pretty accepting of Thorns approach, whilst hoping like hell that it does indeed provide a long term dividend.

I agree fully, in fact I would suggest that player stocks are lower now than pre '96 in terms of real numbers. My argument is that they have narrowed the funnel of players entering the Pro system with their talent identification processes and compound that issue with the massive contracts offered to players from outside that system, often multiples of contracts offered to players who came through the system. The problem with that is short term thinking, yes the individuals may well be that much better, but it undermines the system so that the system no longer produces. I know some would argue that the NRC was supposed to open that funnel to more players, but honestly the season is so short it is meaningless and could easily be replaced with a probables trial game series its that weak. It would have the same following as the NRC as well.

For instance on the development front I look at Australian wingers/fullbacks. We have not produced a truly world class winger or fullback since Burke, Latham, Roff. We have bought some good wingers in Tiquiri and Sailor who proved their mercenary qualities and lack of loyalty to a game they never really had much love for, but the ARU should have known that. Recently we have bought Folau, and he was a world class winger and half a 15. Please do not mention Beale, I wouldn't rate Beale world class at anything to do with Rugby, better than some others in Australia but when you have been paid to do nothing else since your a kid you should be able to pick something up. Now we have fist choice wingers in the Tahs like Clarke - he really is no better than some first grade blokes I see with a Monday to Friday job, just far fitter. We did produce a truly world class 13 in Mortlock though.....

I hope you are right about Thorn - I have reservations, but then I am not invested enough anymore to take that much notice this year, but the games I have seen the Reds play they have swung from being very good one week to being second grade or less the next, and much revolves around Kerevi, if a team shuts him down effectively there isn't much else.

 

[TSR]

I think what he has done is broadened the base and pushed up standards. As far as I understand, whatever he did or didn’t say publicly at the start of the year in close company he was very open about the fact that his side still had a lot of shortcomings and that they were up against it, but that if he could instil in them to be uncompromising about their standards that the fruit would be born down the track.

 

[Show-n-go]

Classifying people as world class is such a slippery slope, it’s so bloody subjective. For example there is no way I would’ve called Mortlock world class, but obviously you do gnostic. What even is the definition? Best in the world? Top 3? Top 5?

Guys like Mccaw, G.Smith, Carter etc are obviously widely regarded as world class but outside of that very top, once in a lifetime players it gets very murky

 

[Derpus]

Classifying people as world class is such a slippery slope, it’s so bloody subjective. For example there is no way I would’ve called Mortlock world class, but obviously you do gnostic. What even is the definition? Best in the world? Top 3? Top 5?

Guys like Mccaw, G.Smith, Carter etc are obviously widely regarded as world class but outside of that very top, once in a lifetime players it gets very murky

World class is you make a world 15, surely. So top two locks, top THP and LHP etc.

 

[Show-n-go]

World class is you make a world 15, surely. So top two locks, top THP and LHP etc.

But see there’s a problem. G.smith and mccaw played at the same time would you say one of those two weren’t world class?

 

[Derpus]

But see there’s a problem. G.smith and mccaw played at the same time would you say one of those two weren’t world class?

There can only be one.

 

[liquor box]

World class is you make a world 15, surely. So top two locks, top THP and LHP etc.

I think world class means you can play top flight rugby anywhere in the world and get in the starting 15 of any team in that country.

 

[Derpus]

I think world class means you can play top flight rugby anywhere in the world and get in the starting 15 of any team in that country.

Isn't that the same thing? To be able to get into literally any team, you'd have to be the best in your position.

Like if Richie McCaw wanted to play for the Wallabies (lol) you'd most likely bench Smith for McCaw making McCaw the World Class player (or vice versa, if that were your opinion).

Obviously where the difference between players is so slight it becomes a matter of opinion and that's when the fun internet arguments start.

 

[Rebels3]

But see there’s a problem. G.smith and mccaw played at the same time would you say one of those two weren’t world class?

World class to me has always been that you play at a high level consistently at the highest level.

There is more than 2 world class locks going around Retalick, Whitelock, Itoje, Etzebeth, Ryan

Soccer is a great game to identify the need for simply more than a starting 11 worth of players.

Or cricket, there has been times where there has been 6-7 world class fast bowlers at the same time. There has been Lillie, Hadley, the West Indian trio, Thommo, Kapil Dev, etc. to only state 3 of these guys are allowed to be world class is a crime.

 

[upthereds#!]

World class is could happily play International Rugby for anyone. A class player, anywhere in the world, competing for or against anybody in the world.

Reds have 1 maybe 2 world class players (Kerevi). I would struggle to put Tupou, Tui and Rodda as world class as yet, they are just starting out on the international stage for the wallabies, and the wallabies aren't a dominant team.

 

[Beer Baron]

World class is could happily play International Rugby for anyone. A class player, anywhere in the world, competing for or against anybody in the world.

Reds have 1 maybe 2 world class players (Kerevi). I would struggle to put Tupou, Tui and Rodda as world class as yet, they are just starting out on the international stage for the wallabies, and the wallabies aren't a dominant team.

Agreed. But given both Kerevi and Rodda are yet to dominate/excel at international level - i think they would be premature as well

 

[Bobby Sands]

Agreed. But given both Kerevi and Rodda are yet to dominate/excel at international level - i think they would be premature as well

Agree, but doubt they would not be starters at any team in the world.

Its a weird metric (for lack of a better word) mainly because it doesn't have a definition.

 

[upthereds#!]

Agree, but doubt they would not be starters at any team in the world.

Its a weird metric (for lack of a better word) mainly because it doesn't have a definition.

I'm sure plenty here are confident they should be handed the task of creating such a definition!

 

[liquor box]

Isn't that the same thing? To be able to get into literally any team, you'd have to be the best in your position.

Like if Richie McCaw wanted to play for the Wallabies (lol) you'd most likely bench Smith for McCaw making McCaw the World Class player (or vice versa, if that were your opinion).

Obviously where the difference between players is so slight it becomes a matter of opinion and that's when the fun internet arguments start.

I was thinking more about a step down from Test matches.

There are some countries that seem to specialize in certain positions. A world class player would get a run in any of the countries.

Eg a world class prop would get picked in Argentina or Europe, a world class second rower would get picked in South Africa, a world class 10 would get picked in NZ, a world class coach would get to coach at the Reds

The Reds have some great players but very few would get picked straight away in countries that "specialise" in their position.

 

[The Nomad]

I was thinking more about a step down from Test matches.

There are some countries that seem to specialize in certain positions. A world class player would get a run in any of the countries.

Eg a world class prop would get picked in Argentina or Europe, a world class second rower would get picked in South Africa, a world class 10 would get picked in NZ, a world class coach would get to coach at the Reds

The Reds have some great players but very few would get picked straight away in countries that "specialise" in their position.

We’ve had some pretty handy centres over the years including 1999 international player of the year Tim Horan . Think Kefu , Eales and Wilson would have got a start in most teams of the time , could go on but you hopefully know what I mean .

 

[Tomikin]

I was thinking more about a step down from Test matches.

There are some countries that seem to specialize in certain positions. A world class player would get a run in any of the countries.

Eg a world class prop would get picked in Argentina or Europe, a world class second rower would get picked in South Africa, a world class 10 would get picked in NZ, a world class coach would get to coach at the Reds

The Reds have some great players but very few would get picked straight away in countries that "specialise" in their position.

 

[The torpedo]

 

[Tomikin]

Probably would have done a better job at coaching