Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
International Test Matches
To the New Zealanders
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="nickdnz" data-source="post: 405133" data-attributes="member: 38640"><p>The point is, he doesn't excell in anything. I disagree that he breaks tackles, and no number of stats will change my mind on that. If it wasn't for the fact that Fruean/SBW/Carter/Dagg/Maitland all require attention, Guildford would not make a quater of the number of line breaks. There are three things I agree he does well. He has a very good work rate, he runs good support lines and he is relatively safe under the high ball. However that is as far as it goes. For all of Gear's criticisms on defense, he's hardly missed a tackle this season, and the game against the Highlanders, he can hardly be criticized when the whole team looked pretty average.</p><p> </p><p>My biggest problem about Gear crfitics, is that their argument always seem to be that he looks good in attack, especially at the lower levels, but he goes missing in positioning and defense, ands therefore cannot step up. He then goes on to have a sublime EoYT, and people then go on to say "That was against England, Wales, Ireland and Scotland, he won't do well in the Tri Nations. It just seems really strage that he is constantly said to be below par (when playing for the Canes and Wellington) regardless of his form, but when he does do well, people can't wait to see him changed for a more safe, but less talented winger like Guildford. Guildford looked pretty average despite all the hype in his All Black games, where as Gear scored five tries in four games.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="nickdnz, post: 405133, member: 38640"] The point is, he doesn't excell in anything. I disagree that he breaks tackles, and no number of stats will change my mind on that. If it wasn't for the fact that Fruean/SBW/Carter/Dagg/Maitland all require attention, Guildford would not make a quater of the number of line breaks. There are three things I agree he does well. He has a very good work rate, he runs good support lines and he is relatively safe under the high ball. However that is as far as it goes. For all of Gear's criticisms on defense, he's hardly missed a tackle this season, and the game against the Highlanders, he can hardly be criticized when the whole team looked pretty average. My biggest problem about Gear crfitics, is that their argument always seem to be that he looks good in attack, especially at the lower levels, but he goes missing in positioning and defense, ands therefore cannot step up. He then goes on to have a sublime EoYT, and people then go on to say "That was against England, Wales, Ireland and Scotland, he won't do well in the Tri Nations. It just seems really strage that he is constantly said to be below par (when playing for the Canes and Wellington) regardless of his form, but when he does do well, people can't wait to see him changed for a more safe, but less talented winger like Guildford. Guildford looked pretty average despite all the hype in his All Black games, where as Gear scored five tries in four games. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
International Test Matches
To the New Zealanders
Top