• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

The Tom Carter incident

Status
Not open for further replies.

ShtinaTina

Alex Ross (28)
Daz, on the money with that post.

Eye gouging is a low act, do it & someone is bound to be either reversibly or irreversibly damaged. Had his sight been affected, you could expect a much longer suspension. Byrnes is lucky it didn't.
 
P

Paradox

Guest
I don't like Carter. His (often dyed) hair is floppy and his voice shreeky.
 

cyclopath

George Smith (75)
Staff member
That's what I was thinking. Or just drop the original "is", which seems more poetic!
The thread has reached thread Nirvana, it has become art.
 
P

Paradox

Guest
Ok, final edit.

I don't like Carter. His (oft dyed) hair is floppy and voice shreeky.
 
D

daz

Guest
I always get really shocked when people measure getting picked for the Wallabies with being a good player.

.

Well, I think you have to be good at the very least.

At least, I hope the selectors are looking for good. I'd prefer that they were looking for "unbelievably awesome" or "fuck me, that is a shoe-in for a future team of the century player", or even "the man's a freak, give him a Gold jumper immediately".

Unless you were a forward circa 2007-09, in which case just simply being able to stand, have a pulse and not be called Baxter or Dunning was the qualifying mark.

:cool:
 

Sandpit Fan

Nev Cottrell (35)
The moment /snip/ respect a bloke who clearly plays the game his way, and has the love of his team-mates while doing it.

Watch it there Daz, or you might cop a white card from the mods.. Reality has no place in this thread!
 
  • Like
Reactions: daz

Cutter

Nicholas Shehadie (39)
I always get really shocked when people measure getting picked for the Wallabies with being a good player.

Wallaby selection isn't stat, win, lose or anything in between based, it's always going to come down to personnal preference of the selection panel.

Tom Carter doesn't play international rugby, he plays supeRugby, he doe. Very fine job of it and I base this on the fact he achieves fir the team he is in. He doenst need to achieve for anyone else. Just for his teammates who all rate him really highly.

If he never gets selected for higher honors, does a diminish what he dies, hell no.

Following this logic, someone who plays club rugby but never goes further shouldn't be measured by their failure to progress. I'm not sure the logic is sound.

TC's failure to progress to the Wallabies doesn't diminish what he does at Super level, but it is significant to anyone involved in rugby at that level. There aren't many players who are good enough to be internationals who don't get picked. On the other hand, there are probably a few who aren't good enough but do get picked.
 

waratahjesus

Greg Davis (50)
Following this logic, someone who plays club rugby but never goes further shouldn't be measured by their failure to progress. I'm not sure the logic is sound.

TC's failure to progress to the Wallabies doesn't diminish what he does at Super level, but it is significant to anyone involved in rugby at that level. There aren't many players who are good enough to be internationals who don't get picked. On the other hand, there are probably a few who aren't good enough but do get picked.

Someone who performs well at club level is still a Goidelic player for there team regardless of honors.

It's sound logic, if your helping your team produce, your good.

The wallabies doesn't always equal the best players, it's the best players that fit a coaches vision.
 

redstragic

Alan Cameron (40)
That's what I was thinking. Or just drop the original "is", which seems more poetic!
The thread has reached thread Nirvana, it has become art.


Thankyou guys for giving me the moment where I can take something from this mess that will make me a better person. I can cancel the psychology sessions. Internal conflict resolved.
 
L

Linebacker_41

Guest
I had a friend tell me yesterday that he thought Byrnes got a reduction on his suspension not because of good behaviour but due to the fact that it was done on Carter.

So wrong but yet again so funny.
 

Godfrey

Phil Hardcastle (33)
So I guess my conclusion is that carter is at least pretty good and performs at his potential but has been overlooked for players that arguably have higher potential that is not as consistently reached. He is also mouthy which annoys some and delights others. Case closed?
 

waratahjesus

Greg Davis (50)
So I guess my conclusion is that carter is at least pretty good and performs at his potential but has been overlooked for players that arguably have higher potential that is not as consistently reached. He is also mouthy which annoys some and delights others. Case closed?


I believe you have reached "your opinion" but nit "case closed" there is still alot if rugby to be played and the doubters are going to have to find better excuses each round.
 

Godfrey

Phil Hardcastle (33)
Sorry, didn't mean that to sound like I had declared "the opinion" for everyone. Just that was my distillation of this thread into some kind of medium ground.. Comprising and all that. I don't think he's a bad player - I just wouldn't pick him above anyone that's made the Wallabies so far at 12 (possibly not McCabe).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top