Rugby 2012 player ratings? Players with 99

[age_master]

Richie McCaw is easily the best in the world at the moment and should be the most highly rated. Whether that rating is 99 or 95 everyone else should be below him.

 

[_George]

Richie McCaw is easily the best in the world at the moment and should be the most highly rated. Whether that rating is 99 or 95 everyone else should be below him.

McCaw might be the best player in his position but not overall . Skill wise he lacks alot of fundamentals like passing and beating defenders one on one .

 

[ranger]

McCaw might be the best player in his position but not overall . Skill wise he lacks alot of fundamentals like passing and beating defenders one on one .

" Skill wise he lacks alot of fundamentals like passing"; See first try in this video



"and beating defenders one on one"; See 1:55



In summation, you are talking nonsense. Feel ashamed.

 

[_George]

that is exactly wat i mean; he aint no Victor Vito or Pierre Spies . he cant be the best player in the world if David Pocock beats him 5:1 either . he is past his best; he may be in the top 10 but not best player in the world .

 

[ranger]

that is exactly wat i mean; he aint no Victor Vito or Pierre Spies . he cant be the best player in the world if David Pocock beats him 5:1 either . he is past his best; he may be in the top 10 but not best player in the world .

What? How is that exactly what you mean.. that first video is the best example of link play from a loose forward that you will find anywhere. I cant even tell if you are serious

 

[squirrel]

best player has to be du preez

 

[Conal]

there is no single best player in the world
as the best fly half cant prop
the best props cant be flyhalfs (rue of thumb)
there is nonly best in your position and even within that there is best type of player within your position so like the best flanker could be argued as the best enforcers eg ferris are not the best fetchers eg brussow
there is no one player who does everything

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

Relative to other players in his position, McCaw is the best in the world. Relative to other players outside his position McCaw is the best in the world - he is not a complete player but it is not his job to be. He is the complete Flanker, and there is no other player in the world who is 'complete' for their position.

 

[Celestial Panda]

All this talk only serves to highlight how stupid the overall rating system is. I'd prefer one more like the Pro Evo soccer series, where it's a hexagon that shows six attributes (like speed, attack, defence etc).

This places less emphasis on a rating, and causes less arguments overall.

[Sorry for the rubbish screenshot, it's the best I could find with my limited Google ability]

 

[_George]

i think du Preez and Cory Jane are the most complate players for their positions .

 

[Hamez]

As long as the stat points are right for the players, I dont care what their overall rating is.

 

[dan the man]

As long as players stats are relative to each others it doesn't matter if the highest player has 99 or 95... eg. I'm sure Habana will end up having the most speed in the game yet i recall Hosea Gear running him down in the super 14!

 

[dan the man]

i think du Preez and Cory Jane are the most complate players for their positions .

I tend to agree with you. Cory Jane is incredible!!!

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Does Jane come from a League background? That catch was immense

 

[Hamez]

As long as players stats are relative to each others it doesn't matter if the highest player has 99 or 95... eg. I'm sure Habana will end up having the most speed in the game yet i recall Hosea Gear running him down in the super 14!

yes relatve is a better word!

 

[nadoss]

I agree with TVH11, there should be no 99.

As per the above players, here is what I would rate them (under the FIFA-scale):

richie mccaw (new zealand & crusaders): 92
dan carter (new zealand & crusaders): 93
ma'a nonu (new zealand & hurricanes): 80
fourie du preez (south africa & bulls): 92
pierre spies (south africa & bulls): 90
schalk burger (south africa & stormers): 87
victor matfield (south africa & bulls): 91
yannick jauzion (france & toulouse): 84
thierry dusautoir (france & toulouse): 85
clement poitrenaud (france & toulouse): 81
tommy bowe (ireland & ospreys): 80
chris ashton (england & saints): ?
rocky elsom (australia & brumbies): 81
shane williams (wales & ospreys): 83

This way, when you have a highly rated player (mid 80s-90s) that it actually means something.

I definitely agree that 99 should be tough to reach, but you can't have players like tommy bowe and ma'a nonu as low as 80, because then, it doesn't leave enough room below 80 to accurately depict teams like USA, or Russia, or lower level clubs like Connacht and Roma, Connacht would likely end up with a rating of like 15, because they dont have any players nearly as good as Bowe or Nonu. I think it should go like this.
90+ = Top class, amazing players, best in the world (like Carter, McCaw, Burger, O'Driscoll, Nonu, etc.)
80-90 = Great Players, Not yet the finest, or just past their prime.
70-80 = Very Good Players, Get MoM occasionally
60-70 = Good players, good enough to play for the international teams but not the first name you'd recognize
50-60 = Average players, get called up to international teams occasionally. the better players on USA, Canada, Portugal, Namibia, etc. will be these players as well.
40-50 = The meat of the players, normal players on most major clubs, not yet on international teams. Also, most of the players on USA, Canada, Portugal, Namibia, etc. will be these players.
30-40 = Some clubs have to fill holes with these players, also, quite a few positions on USA, Canada, Portugal, Namibia etc. will have to contain these characters.
20-30 = Really shouldn't be in pro rugby. Subs for lower clubs. might be a few in the above nations international teams.
10-20 = Extremely rare. If you are on a crappy club and you have three injured players, you might have to play someone this bad.
0-10 = Me. hahahaha.

 

[verigoat]

As long as players stats are relative to each others it doesn't matter if the highest player has 99 or 95... eg. I'm sure Habana will end up having the most speed in the game yet i recall Hosea Gear running him down in the super 14!

The America winger outpaced him with ease

 

[hughorton]

On fifa 10 messi only goes as high as 90 if a man with the skill he has gets 90 then no player in rugby should go higher than 90 and the rating should vary on the position being played e.g. Mccaw 89 at 7 should drop down to say 85 at 8 and then down to 50 at wing.

 

[nadoss]

well, the overall rating is really just a number derived from the stats which they find to be important to the position. For example, if you're a prop with 50 goal kicking as opposed to another prop with 20 goal kicking, it doesn't change the number at all, because goal kicking has little importance to a prop's position. But, as I said again, if McCaw is 89, then Bowe or Nonu would have to be a bit lower, and the other players who dont get as much recognition will be lower still, and the players who are sometimes on the international teams would be even lower then that, and teams like uruguay would be 13 overall, which is stupid.

 

[ranger]

On fifa 10 messi only goes as high as 90 if a man with the skill he has gets 90 then no player in rugby should go higher than 90 and the rating should vary on the position being played e.g. Mccaw 89 at 7 should drop down to say 85 at 8 and then down to 50 at wing.

Not entirely sure what Lionel Messi has got to do with Richie McCaw and a rugby game to be honest..