The Greatest: Final Teams & Discussion

First topic message reminder :

These threads started on 19 December 2012.

Over the next three months, you shortlisted players in each position from a (very) long list which I provided and then you chose your team. Votes are now in and there are three teams below – (i) the one you chose as consisting of the greatest players ever, (ii) the runners-up in each position and (iii) my own best XV.

I. Greatest XV Ever (as chosen by 606v2):

1. Ian McLauchlan (Scotland)
2. Sean Fitzpatrick (New Zealand)
3. Jason Leonard (England)
4. Martin Johnson (England)
5. John Eales (Australia)
6. Richard Hill (England)
7. Michael Jones (New Zealand)
8. Zinzan Brooke (New Zealand)

9. Joost van der Westhuizen (South Africa)
10. Daniel Carter (New Zealand)
11. Jonah Lomu (New Zealand)
12. Tim Horan (Australia)
13. Philippe Sella (France)
14. Jason Robinson (England)
15. Christian Cullen (New Zealand)

II. Runner-Up XV (as chosen by 606v2):

1. Os du Randt (South Africa)
2. Keith Wood (Ireland)
3. Carl Hayman (New Zealand)
4. Victor Matfield (South Africa)
5. Willie-John McBride (Ireland)
6. Juan Smith (South Africa)
7. Richie McCaw (New Zealand)
8. Lawrence Dallaglio (England)

9. Gareth Edwards (Wales)
10. Barry John (Wales)
11. David Campese (Australia)
12. Will Greenwood (England)
13. Brian O'Driscoll (Ireland)
14. Rupeni Caucaunibuca (Fiji)
15. JPR Williams (Wales)

III. My Own:

1. Os du Randt (South Africa)
2. Sean Fitzpatrick (New Zealand)
3. Graham Price (Wales)
4. Colin Meads (New Zealand)
5. John Eales (Australia)
6. Michael Jones (New Zealand)
7. Richie McCaw (New Zealand)
8. Zinzan Brooke (New Zealand)

9. Gareth Edwards (Wales)
10. Daniel Carter (New Zealand)
11. David Campese (Australia)
12. Mike Gibson (Ireland)
13. Philippe Sella (France)
14. Jeff Wilson (New Zealand)
15. Christian Cullen (New Zealand)

I think that this is an interesting reflection on the age (I would think 21-35 is normal) and demographic (almost entirely NH, it seems, so thanks to those SH lads that post on here) of these boards.

All thoughts welcome. Feel free to post your own teams, but do us all a favour and please, please adhere to the following:

1. A list of names without context or justification isn’t very useful or particularly interesting.

2. If you’re going to moan about the first two teams above, then please direct your grousing to the world as a whole. It was a completely democratic process – ergo, all of you is to blame. I am merely the conduit for the views of the masses.

3. You may, of course, if you wish, avail us all about how you know better than the players themselves or their own mothers that someone listed is not in their ‘correct’ position. That’s your right. However, pause for a moment to notice that (a) player information was based on a number of sources - I can substantiate with reference to players' own opinions where they felt they were most at home, (b) it is a binary comment which adds nothing constructive to the debate and (c) judging by a whole load of PMs that I received over the course of this exercise, you bored the living hole off everyone the first time that you did it.

Most importantly, thanks to everyone who participated – these things only work if everyone plays well and enthusiastically which by and large, everyone did.

Taylorman.... if you read what I said again you'll see I am saying a 10 needs to be much more than a kicker, that Farrell isn't all that hot (yet)...and that you still pick him out as the only bright light in Europe - "Steady"

I'm Irish..my post was telling you that Farrell isn't in Sexton's league as a 10 yet (in Europe) and yet Farrell is the guy you mention as the next best shot in Europe.

So in a strange way, I'm agreeing with your second post...but you're not agreeing with your first one. Sometimes look at more than England for your 'next best' offerings is what I'm saying.

Well we have a different interpretation of what steady is...for me an international 10 being described as steady is in the same vain as mediocre. If someone described Carter as steady in a match I hadnt watched first thing I'd ask is 'Did we win then' despite that, so I wasnt selecting Farrell for praise.

He just seemed to be the pick of the bunch, other 10's hardly setting the place on fire bar Italy's for a while there.

Not sure if you (bothered) to watch Crudens performances but try and see last weeks highlights or perhaps tonights (todays?) match against the Highlanders to illustrate what I mean about straight and direct running, managing an attack. I know its sxv but hey, thats all we have here at the mo.

Taylorman wrote:Well we have a different interpretation of what steady is...for me an international 10 being described as steady is in the same vain as mediocre. If someone described Carter as steady in a match I hadnt watched first thing I'd ask is 'Did we win then' despite that, so I wasnt selecting Farrell for praise.

He just seemed to be the pick of the bunch, other 10's hardly setting the place on fire bar Italy's for a while there.

Not sure if you (bothered) to watch Crudens performances but try and see last weeks highlights or perhaps tonights (todays?) match against the Highlanders to illustrate what I mean about straight and direct running, managing an attack. I know its sxv but hey, thats all we have here at the mo.

Just our little club competition, eh taylorman?

Yep, pure fireworks at the mo...love it, some incredible stuff happening across the board...

Taylorman wrote:Well we have a different interpretation of what steady is...for me an international 10 being described as steady is in the same vain as mediocre. If someone described Carter as steady in a match I hadnt watched first thing I'd ask is 'Did we win then' despite that, so I wasnt selecting Farrell for praise.

He just seemed to be the pick of the bunch, other 10's hardly setting the place on fire bar Italy's for a while there.

Not sure if you (bothered) to watch Crudens performances but try and see last weeks highlights or perhaps tonights (todays?) match against the Highlanders to illustrate what I mean about straight and direct running, managing an attack. I know its sxv but hey, thats all we have here at the mo.

Again Taylor...you don't even seem to want to mention Sexton for some reason Farrell is not the pick of the bunch in Europe. Not many people in Europe would agree with you on that. So I'm just telling you you're choosing the wrong best of the 'mediocre' lot. And you stubbornly keep mentioning him.

You didn't mention Cruden by basing your opinion of him on any given competition, you just said in your opinion he's 2nd best in the world to Carter and probably as good as if not even better. But certainly 2nd a least. Fine - that's your right to say it and think it and you might be right...but you're not basing that on any International form I assume - you're basing it on club form.

Now, when you hit Europe to analyse 10s, you seem to take the 6N (International form) as your measuring stick alone for 10s in Europe. That might be understandable if that's all the rugby from Europe you watch. But it isn't the whole show from Europe and we play club too.

So spread your wings...use the same criteria you use for Cruden. Sexton would be a higher value target for 10 in Europe than Farrell in one competition called the 6N.

Do you understand my point now? Don't automatically throw in Farrell as your "pick of the bunch". Don't throw in Farrell if he isn't the pick of the bunch. I'm suggesting to you that he isn't.

I'll mention sexton for you Fly.

For a number of years now the Auckland Blues have been found wanting in the first five eigth department, we have not produced an All Black Ist 5 since Grant Fox (I dont count Mcallister) and and I often thought, (about three years ago), that they could import one from the Northern Hemisphere, and the only player I saw at the time that could come down here, handle the game, handle the competition. and probably improve and grow from the experience was Jonathan Sexton.

At the time the irish werent really giving him licence to go and just play his natural game.

Sadly that was a couple of years ago and the opportunity is now passed, I should also mention that I dont really qualify as an expert on first fives.

aucklandlaurie wrote: I'll mention sexton for you Fly.

For a number of years now the Auckland Blues have been found wanting in the first five eigth department, we have not produced an All Black Ist 5 since Grant Fox (I dont count Mcallister) and and I often thought, (about three years ago), that they could import one from the Northern Hemisphere, and the only player I saw at the time that could come down here, handle the game, handle the competition. and probably improve and grow from the experience was Jonathan Sexton.

At the time the irish werent really giving him licence to go and just play his natural game.

Sadly that was a couple of years ago and the opportunity is now passed, I should also mention that I dont really qualify as an expert on first fives.

I'm not his cheerleader, by the way..the bugger is off to France! Leaving Leinster with a pup. So he's off my Christmas card list.

But I just tire of the idea that often (not always) but often New Zealanders think of themselves first (obviously and with just cause) and then....em...gotta be England the best of the others in Europe. It's gotta be one of the English guys. Must be.... they're the best of that shower up there in the North.

It's just lazy...and kinda gets to me sometimes. Good players can sometimes play in dreadful sides. Open minds.

Biltong wrote:

Taylorman wrote:Well we have a different interpretation of what steady is...for me an international 10 being described as steady is in the same vain as mediocre. If someone described Carter as steady in a match I hadnt watched first thing I'd ask is 'Did we win then' despite that, so I wasnt selecting Farrell for praise.

He just seemed to be the pick of the bunch, other 10's hardly setting the place on fire bar Italy's for a while there.

Not sure if you (bothered) to watch Crudens performances but try and see last weeks highlights or perhaps tonights (todays?) match against the Highlanders to illustrate what I mean about straight and direct running, managing an attack. I know its sxv but hey, thats all we have here at the mo.

Just our little club competition, eh taylorman?

And hopefully this year we'll see a couple, ok, maybe one aussie team break up the cosy twosome huh??

OzT wrote:

Biltong wrote:

Taylorman wrote:Well we have a different interpretation of what steady is...for me an international 10 being described as steady is in the same vain as mediocre. If someone described Carter as steady in a match I hadnt watched first thing I'd ask is 'Did we win then' despite that, so I wasnt selecting Farrell for praise.

He just seemed to be the pick of the bunch, other 10's hardly setting the place on fire bar Italy's for a while there.

Not sure if you (bothered) to watch Crudens performances but try and see last weeks highlights or perhaps tonights (todays?) match against the Highlanders to illustrate what I mean about straight and direct running, managing an attack. I know its sxv but hey, thats all we have here at the mo.

Just our little club competition, eh taylorman?

And hopefully this year we'll see a couple, ok, maybe one aussie team break up the cosy twosome huh??

Well the Brumbies looks awesome and the Reds might well be there too.

Yeah I was pinning my hopes on the brumbies for the aussie contribution... not surprised bull sup there but seemingly stormers lagging a bit

I think SA are in for a poor super xv.

Why do you say that? Just the other week it was 3/3 SA vs NZ. Okay just one week but who the heck really knows whose going to perform. Lots of people were picking the Highlanders to have a really good year.
Me, personally I think the Blues will win it - have said that before kick off.

SecretFly wrote:

Taylorman wrote:Well we have a different interpretation of what steady is...for me an international 10 being described as steady is in the same vain as mediocre. If someone described Carter as steady in a match I hadnt watched first thing I'd ask is 'Did we win then' despite that, so I wasnt selecting Farrell for praise.

He just seemed to be the pick of the bunch, other 10's hardly setting the place on fire bar Italy's for a while there.

Not sure if you (bothered) to watch Crudens performances but try and see last weeks highlights or perhaps tonights (todays?) match against the Highlanders to illustrate what I mean about straight and direct running, managing an attack. I know its sxv but hey, thats all we have here at the mo.

Again Taylor...you don't even seem to want to mention Sexton for some reason Farrell is not the pick of the bunch in Europe. Not many people in Europe would agree with you on that. So I'm just telling you you're choosing the wrong best of the 'mediocre' lot. And you stubbornly keep mentioning him.

You didn't mention Cruden by basing your opinion of him on any given competition, you just said in your opinion he's 2nd best in the world to Carter and probably as good as if not even better. But certainly 2nd a least. Fine - that's your right to say it and think it and you might be right...but you're not basing that on any International form I assume - you're basing it on club form.

Now, when you hit Europe to analyse 10s, you seem to take the 6N (International form) as your measuring stick alone for 10s in Europe. That might be understandable if that's all the rugby from Europe you watch. But it isn't the whole show from Europe and we play club too.

So spread your wings...use the same criteria you use for Cruden. Sexton would be a higher value target for 10 in Europe than Farrell in one competition called the 6N.

Do you understand my point now? Don't automatically throw in Farrell as your "pick of the bunch". Don't throw in Farrell if he isn't the pick of the bunch. I'm suggesting to you that he isn't.

One- the reference to Cruden was made by Ngan who said one of our comments was about the fact that Cruden is 'currently' playing better than DC. Currently, without having to mention it, refers to the sxv which started 4 weeks ago.

Two- and in keeping it current, I watched most of the matches of the 6N bar a couple and since Sexton hasnt played for 5 or so weeks now, the comments I have made have been based on the observations of the last 2-3 matches, hence my Goosen comment- he's out for six months because of an injury last week. Cooper has had dismal form in the last 3 weeks. Berrick Barnes is injured because of a dislocated thumb. Michalak was terrible, Wales didnt seem to know who to put in, Farrell was 'steady' at best and I didnt mention the Irish 10 because it wasnt Sexton, who, if injured as he currently is- doesnt 'merit' mention as a current 10 in this argument. And I mentioned most of this before you got on your horse.

So I have looked at both the NH 10's fairly closely, I've also looked at the best of the sxv 10's, not just the 3 test playing 10's to come to that conclusion. Have you? No, you've only considered, well, the Irish 10- who aint even playing now.

So instead of getting on your high horse accusing me of not being 'open minded' take a look at yourself before doing so. Which SH 10's have you looked at for example?

So to restate it, after watching or keeping up to date with the news of approximately 15 of the top 10's around the 'world' recently I've come to that conclusion that for one reason or another, 'currently' NZ probably have no. 1 and 2 10's around. So play the NZ ignoramus card with someone else fly. Yes I believe in general NZ have the best players but I also have sound reasons for most of it, simply being an NZer isnt one of them.

And international form or not he superxv is right up there with the 6N in terms of the quality of players turning out. Tonights Highlanders vs Chiefs match will probably contain 10 or so World cup winning players- 10 more than any of the 6N matches had so that doesnt work for me either. I dont need to use NH club form when 6 nations are at it, just like I wouldnt use it when the 4N's are on. Both comparisons are made from the highest levels available at the time.

And simply not true about England...we see France as the best in Europe for obvious and genuine reasons.

Gotta love how the greatest team in the world discussion turns into a Sexton v Farrell discussion

With regards to the two teams, I'd pretty much be half half between the first and second choice teams. Trouble is, I'm a bit young to remember the 70s etc and so my selection of Edwards or John (as an example) would be based on highlights or reputation.

SecretFly wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote: I'll mention sexton for you Fly.

For a number of years now the Auckland Blues have been found wanting in the first five eigth department, we have not produced an All Black Ist 5 since Grant Fox (I dont count Mcallister) and and I often thought, (about three years ago), that they could import one from the Northern Hemisphere, and the only player I saw at the time that could come down here, handle the game, handle the competition. and probably improve and grow from the experience was Jonathan Sexton.

At the time the irish werent really giving him licence to go and just play his natural game.

Sadly that was a couple of years ago and the opportunity is now passed, I should also mention that I dont really qualify as an expert on first fives.

I'm not his cheerleader, by the way..the bugger is off to France! Leaving Leinster with a pup. So he's off my Christmas card list.

But I just tire of the idea that often (not always) but often New Zealanders think of themselves first (obviously and with just cause) and then....em...gotta be England the best of the others in Europe. It's gotta be one of the English guys. Must be.... they're the best of that shower up there in the North.

It's just lazy...and kinda gets to me sometimes. Good players can sometimes play in dreadful sides. Open minds.

.





You seem to a have also dismissed the possibility that some New Zealanders often just straight out disagree with you, I wont comment on the laziness and open minds remarks.

A world 1st or 2nd team without Coiln Meads!

Well done on this collation of selection.

I must admit to getting a bit annoyed at it after feeling so old and decrepit after so many players I cherished throughout my life have been long forgotten by youthful fans in a professional era. How Ian McLauchlin made it through as a loosehead and Gerald Davies didnt as a winger baffles me.

But it has been a wonderfully and interesting read.

Thank you.

My team

Ian McLachlan
Sean Fitzpatrick
Graham Price
Colin Meads
John Eales
Dai Morris
Michael Jones
Mervyn Davies
Gareth
Barry
Campo
Tim Horan
Bleddyn Williams
Gerald Davies
JPR

Farrell / England were let down up front in the games v France Italy Wales, so bit harsh to judge him on those matches.
Farrell could use a decent creative 12 outside him to pass to, and some competent wings to kick to.
I'm not championing Farrell especially but lately he has been surrounded front / right / left by either poor players or out of position players.
With Morgan, Foden, 12trees back in the team, we could expect to see a more varied play options from Farrell.

I personlly think if Farrell had a good 9 inside him and a 12 and 13 who were world class, then playing behind a front 8 on the front foot with total domination with creative wingers and an attacking full back he would be a very very good outside half.

Ruby, naughty . A a proper no8, proper 11, and a more creative 12 and a form 14. SLs experimental no8 + back 3 plainly failed. England have more appropriate selections available, and I have no doubt SL will use them next time. Ben Youngs at SH will be fine with a decent no8 back in.

It seems to be widely accepted that number 8 is a contest between Dallaglio and Brooke.

Are these two so far ahead of Sergio Parisse that the great Italian doesn't get a mention?

Always hard to judge a player from a nation that so far hasn't won anything, but I must say that Parisse has been consistently excellent for club and country for nearly a decade, and in my view pushes Brooke and Dallaglio extremely close.

From what I recall Parisse wasn't as stand out at SF when they had all the star players amongst them whereas Dillaglio and Brooke were standouts in domestic rugby as much as test rugby.

Funny I thought it was between Brooke and Buck at voting time, though I'd be happy with either of the 3, Dallaglio was very key to that 03 side.

Even though he was key strangely enough I'm sure he was almost dropped for the final in 2003.

He and SCW had a mini bust up about his form in the KO stages (can't recall if it was the SF or the F).

cool, would have been good to watch em go at it...