Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="nickdnz" data-source="post: 705171" data-attributes="member: 38640">Couldn&#039;t be bothered responding but I guess I will.Did you even even read the article I posted? I&#039;m not sure how my point was missed.My article posted was that Sonny Bill Williams was used at 6 for six games at Toulon, as opposed to &#039;exclusively at centre&#039;. The article (which is dated November 2010, a relatively similar time as Burgess started playing) features speculation on where he will play Super Rugby from journalists and Wayne Smith:Now the point of this article was pointing that there was still speculation - leading into a Rugby World Cup year - whether he would in fact be played as a centre of blindside. Wayne Smith was the assistant couch of the All Blacks, so it&#039;s not exactly &#039;clear to everyone&#039;. Even in this article he was used as a 13 in the previous game. He played one of his Canterbury games at wing and wasn&#039;t considered there again until the Rugby World Cup, where they made room for him. The direct comparison between Sonny Bill Williams and Sam Burgess was in the medias speculation of a &#039;project&#039; resulting in selection. I was never meaning to infer that Sonny Bill Williams had not had more experience than Sam Burgess - however in the eyes of the NZRU&#039;s coaches, and the NZ media, he clearly was still considered a project. Again - whether it is reality of not - form in the Top 14 is not supposed to influence NZRU coaching decisions. It is meant to be based on form in NPC/SR...&nbsp;Again, SBW was approached pre-2008 to play rugby union. Had he played poorly in the Top 14 I&#039;m sure it would have affected NZRU perusing him. I probably didn&#039;t give enough credit to his final season in Toulon. However in 2009, the media rhetoric surrounding Sonny Bill Williams was still as a &quot;player with huge potential&quot;, rather than a finished product.When I posted: I vastly underestimated the pedantic nature of our members. Now I think the thread has probably used its designated page to go off topic. I welcome anyone to PM me as to where exactly I have gone horrifically wrong in this most recent post.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="nickdnz, post: 705171, member: 38640"] Couldn't be bothered responding but I guess I will. Did you even even read the article I posted? I'm not sure how my point was missed. My article posted was that Sonny Bill Williams was used at 6 for six games at Toulon, as opposed to 'exclusively at centre'. The article (which is dated November 2010, a relatively similar time as Burgess started playing) features speculation on where he will play Super Rugby from journalists and Wayne Smith: Now the point of this article was pointing that there was still speculation - leading into a Rugby World Cup year - whether he would in fact be played as a centre of blindside. Wayne Smith was the assistant couch of the All Blacks, so it's not exactly 'clear to everyone'. Even in this article he was used as a 13 in the previous game. He played one of his Canterbury games at wing and wasn't considered there again until the Rugby World Cup, where they made room for him. The direct comparison between Sonny Bill Williams and Sam Burgess was in the medias speculation of a 'project' resulting in selection. I was never meaning to infer that Sonny Bill Williams had not had more experience than Sam Burgess - however in the eyes of the NZRU's coaches, and the NZ media, he clearly was still considered a project. Again - whether it is reality of not - form in the Top 14 is not supposed to influence NZRU coaching decisions. It is meant to be based on form in NPC/SR... Again, SBW was approached pre-2008 to play rugby union. Had he played poorly in the Top 14 I'm sure it would have affected NZRU perusing him. I probably didn't give enough credit to his final season in Toulon. However in 2009, the media rhetoric surrounding Sonny Bill Williams was still as a "player with huge potential", rather than a finished product. When I posted: I vastly underestimated the pedantic nature of our members. Now I think the thread has probably used its designated page to go off topic. I welcome anyone to PM me as to where exactly I have gone horrifically wrong in this most recent post. [/QUOTE]

Verification