Originally posted by Gibbon
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Is Rugby turning a bit, erm...metrosexual?
Collapse
X
-
And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014 -
You may be right about lomu not being able to dominate as physically as he did, but he would still be the most formidable wing in the world if he had been playing (and training to todays standards) today.
Likewise Campese. Whilst defences are indeed better organised he would have adapted to todays training standards and would have been one of the best wingers in world rugby.
it is quite ridiculous to say that yesterdays players would not have competed in todays rugby as yesterdays players would have been training according to standards of todays professionals.Let us not forget EU open doors immigration benefits IT contractors more than anyoneComment
-
Official RWC 2015 Site - RWC 2015
Interesting reading back on recent history like this. Zinzan Brook recalls having great difficulty tackling Lomu himself and he was by no means small.
They do agree with your point Mich regarding modern training methods etc and that Lomu caught people unprepared in that era.
I still maintain he'd have a huge impact in the modern game due to his size/speed/hand-off and the sheer size of his bloody thighs!Comment
-
Originally posted by DodgyAgent View PostYou may be right about lomu not being able to dominate as physically as he did, but he would still be the most formidable wing in the world if he had been playing (and training to todays standards) today.
Likewise Campese. Whilst defences are indeed better organised he would have adapted to todays training standards and would have been one of the best wingers in world rugby.
it is quite ridiculous to say that yesterdays players would not have competed in todays rugby as yesterdays players would have been training according to standards of todays professionals.And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014Comment
-
It's just part of the evolution of the game IMHO. As the forwards have transitioned from being fat knackers to mountains that can move at pace, the back have had to get bigger to compensate. And vicky-vercky , bigger backs mean you need more agile muscle to take them out. All part of being a professional game.
Case in point is that the likes of Shane Williams' days were numbered (again IMVHO).
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mich the Tester View PostOf course I can't prove it, but it's common sense that Lomu would not smash guys like Tuilagi, Tindall, Ellison, SBW or Visser out of the way like he did to Carling and so, simply because those guys are so much more powerful than in the past; he wouldn't be such an exception these days.But I discovered nothing else but depraved, excessive superstition. Pliny the youngerComment
-
Originally posted by fckvwls View PostOfficial RWC 2015 Site - RWC 2015
Interesting reading back on recent history like this. Zinzan Brook recalls having great difficulty tackling Lomu himself and he was by no means small.
They do agree with your point Mich regarding modern training methods etc and that Lomu caught people unprepared in that era.
I still maintain he'd have a huge impact in the modern game due to his size/speed/hand-off and the sheer size of his bloody thighs!
Brooke was brilliant, but not very big; 6'3'' and 16 stone; that's not big at all for a back row forward in first class rugby.And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014Comment
-
If anyone is overrated due to poor defence making him look good it's manu tuilagi.
imho.Keeping calm. Keeping invoicing.Comment
-
Originally posted by Pondlife View PostIt's just part of the evolution of the game IMHO. As the forwards have transitioned from being fat knackers to mountains that can move at pace, the back have had to get bigger to compensate. And vicky-vercky , bigger backs mean you need more agile muscle to take them out. All part of being a professional game.
Case in point is that the likes of Shane Williams' days were numbered (again IMVHO).Last edited by Mich the Tester; 13 November 2012, 12:33.And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014Comment
-
Did I mentioned I was in the same form as Shane Williams at school?
Yes? Well okay, I don't have many claims to fame and that is the best of them.
Not something that people generally care about but it helps in the game of 6 connections.Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Reports of umbrella companies’ death are greatly exaggerated Nov 28 10:11
- A new hiring fraud hinges on a limited company, a passport and ‘Ade’ Nov 27 09:21
- Is an unpaid umbrella company required to pay contractors? Nov 26 09:28
- The truth of umbrella company regulation is being misconstrued Nov 25 09:23
- Labour’s plan to regulate umbrella companies: a closer look Nov 21 09:24
- When HMRC misses an FTT deadline but still wins another CJRS case Nov 20 09:20
- How 15% employer NICs will sting the umbrella company market Nov 19 09:16
- Contracting Awards 2024 hails 19 firms as best of the best Nov 18 09:13
- How to answer at interview, ‘What’s your greatest weakness?’ Nov 14 09:59
- Business Asset Disposal Relief changes in April 2025: Q&A Nov 13 09:37
Comment