Defining Who We Are ... NZ All Blacks
-
@tewaio said in Defining Who We Are ... NZ All Blacks:
The worst thing about these guys leaving is the late-developers never develop fully. Nonu I rate as in the top 3-4 All Blacks ever, but he debuted in 2003 and only really came good post 2007. So many of these guys who are fringe ABs after 1-2 years and then leave, you never know could've turned out to be 100+ test superstars who redefine their position for a generation.
The other end of this is a guy like Kahn Fotuali'i who developed relatively late and was at times the best halfback in the country when Weepu's head wasn't on straight and can't get a cap. If he had not left he would still be waiting for a test cap.
-
@rotated I've got no issue with people going at the end of their career to top up their earnings - people like Mils and more recently Carter, Nonu and Conrad - might have had one, maybe two more AB seasons in them, but we were better off without them pacing themselves through the year to put in a couple of big performances.
I've also got no issue with people like Brad Shields (or Kahn Fotuali'i) going. He's given it a good crack, the ABs have shown little interest, and it opens up a space for the next bright young thing.
-
@mooshld said in Defining Who We Are ... NZ All Blacks:
One aspect that is not being considered is that these younger guys leaving don't just weaken us. It also weakens the country where they choose to play.
Look at France there are loads of already capped players playing here now that are taking up spots of French players. How can the national team be any good if there is no where for the youth to play and if even the already capped players can't get starts.
This will happen in the UK as well, and its bad all round for rugby as a product at the international level.
It's already happening in the UK right? Journeymen like Jimmy Gopperth are blocking the way for up and coming locals
-
@tim said in Defining Who We Are ... NZ All Blacks:
My favourite thing is when people post on here that players like Gopperth or Brock James are actually really good, and NZ'ers just don't understand. Even better when it's a New Zealander making the post.
Both of those two were actually very good for the way their clubs wanted to play. Neither of them were too flash but both did the basics well and did what their coaches asked of them. World beaters no but good solid club players, yes... But I take your point. Another anomaly is Carl Hayman, a legend in black but really only above average up here - maybe he wasn't trying.
-
@canefan said in Defining Who We Are ... NZ All Blacks:
@mooshld said in Defining Who We Are ... NZ All Blacks:
One aspect that is not being considered is that these younger guys leaving don't just weaken us. It also weakens the country where they choose to play.
Look at France there are loads of already capped players playing here now that are taking up spots of French players. How can the national team be any good if there is no where for the youth to play and if even the already capped players can't get starts.
This will happen in the UK as well, and its bad all round for rugby as a product at the international level.
It's already happening in the UK right? Journeymen like Jimmy Gopperth are blocking the way for up and coming locals
My local club Racing are horrendous for this. I can't think of the last guy they developed into a test match player. If my boys show any talent there is no way in hell I would let them play there. You are blocked at every level and even if you do break through you are only one signing away from being back on the bench.
You can't expect up and coming players to out perform experienced test match players with out giving them any game time and the French national team is paying the price.
-
@mooshld said in Defining Who We Are ... NZ All Blacks:
@canefan said in Defining Who We Are ... NZ All Blacks:
@mooshld said in Defining Who We Are ... NZ All Blacks:
One aspect that is not being considered is that these younger guys leaving don't just weaken us. It also weakens the country where they choose to play.
Look at France there are loads of already capped players playing here now that are taking up spots of French players. How can the national team be any good if there is no where for the youth to play and if even the already capped players can't get starts.
This will happen in the UK as well, and its bad all round for rugby as a product at the international level.
It's already happening in the UK right? Journeymen like Jimmy Gopperth are blocking the way for up and coming locals
My local club Racing are horrendous for this. I can't think of the last guy they developed into a test match player. If my boys show any talent there is no way in hell I would let them play there. You are blocked at every level and even if you do break through you are only one signing away from being back on the bench.
You can't expect up and coming players to out perform experienced test match players with out giving them any game time and the French national team is paying the price.
Racing as in DCs club? As long as clubs are owned and run by people who have no interest in building the national team test rugby will suffer
-
@mooshld said in Defining Who We Are ... NZ All Blacks:
Thats the one.
I was in Paris last year, the RM billboard had DC, a long haired Jaap whose name escapes me, and one token frog? NH rugby is just like EPL club football, loaded with stars (many old) but light on local talent.
Edit shows how much I know, the long haired one is a froggie! The team still plays Joe Rok!
-
Hayman was shot. Although lots of ferners wanted him to play longer in Black, clearly he was no longer prepared to do the hard yards. They saw his physical ability untarnished and assumed, wrongly, that his mental game must be too.
In an earlier age he would have just retired cold. David Kirk did, because he wanted other things.
He cashed in for the big dollars, but it wasn't at any cost to the ABs.
-
@chester-draws said in Defining Who We Are ... NZ All Blacks:
Hayman was shot. Although lots of ferners wanted him to play longer in Black, clearly he was no longer prepared to do the hard yards. They saw his physical ability untarnished and assumed, wrongly, that his mental game must be too.
In an earlier age he would have just retired cold. David Kirk did, because he wanted other things.
He cashed in for the big dollars, but it wasn't at any cost to the ABs.
Collins was fried too - sure he came back for Super Rugby the next season but he was mentally gone. I'm not sure whether Rodders drop off a year or so later was more physical.
-
@majorrage when he was capped, I actually thought he'd be one of those players that got a solitary cap, and probably shouldn't have ever been...as it was he got 3 (assuming he wont get another)
-
this can go in here....as it does sort of show the community sprit that still exists in rugby.
-
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12008004
There are some doozies in here.
#2, I will never forgive Mitchell for his treatment of Cullen, and his omission in the 2003 RWC squad. He was arguably the best 15 that S12 season or if not he was a close run 2nd to Mils, bung knees and all
#3 The story about Wayne Bennett is a classic ending to a shambolic campaign
-
The Bennett story is particularly funny given he won the Grand Final the year with Hodges, and Hunt out of their preferred positions and Lockyer was converted from a fullback a year or so earlier.
Won the 2000 final with Mr Utility Shaun Berrigan at 7 too.
In hindsight carrying Carter with the knowledge he would at best make it 40 minutes was the only major selection blunder that day IMO.
-
I read that list, thought it was a bit shit really. Would expect to read better on here.
-
@mariner4life said in Defining Who We Are ... NZ All Blacks:
I read that list, thought it was a bit shit really. Would expect to read better on here.
Yeah a couple of them completely ignore the context ie. Injuries to multiple players.