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
General Rugby Union
Who's better? Lomu or Savea?
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="Darwin" data-source="post: 676199" data-attributes="member: 24910"><p>NickdNZ sums up my thoughts pretty well. Savea is a devastating wing. Lomu was bigger, stronger, faster, and had a brilliant side-step too. I rate Savea as the best wing in world rugby at the moment, but he isn't near as devastating as Lomu was in his prime. Would Lomu be as devastating if he was playing today? I have no doubt he would. We are still yet to see a player close to possessing his speed and power, and given the more intensive training we see these days he would undoubtedly bigger, stronger, and faster than he was back then. Having two functioning kidney's would have made him even more devastating....</p><p></p><p>I do believe players need to be compared relative to their peers in their respective eras. Let's take for example Colin Meads. He is probably the most legendary All Black of all. He was a 6'3 lock weighing around 100 kgs. If he was magically transported in his prime in the modern era he probably wouldn't get a Super Rugby contract. That doesn't mean Mark Reddish is a better lock than Colin Meads was......</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Darwin, post: 676199, member: 24910"] NickdNZ sums up my thoughts pretty well. Savea is a devastating wing. Lomu was bigger, stronger, faster, and had a brilliant side-step too. I rate Savea as the best wing in world rugby at the moment, but he isn't near as devastating as Lomu was in his prime. Would Lomu be as devastating if he was playing today? I have no doubt he would. We are still yet to see a player close to possessing his speed and power, and given the more intensive training we see these days he would undoubtedly bigger, stronger, and faster than he was back then. Having two functioning kidney's would have made him even more devastating.... I do believe players need to be compared relative to their peers in their respective eras. Let's take for example Colin Meads. He is probably the most legendary All Black of all. He was a 6'3 lock weighing around 100 kgs. If he was magically transported in his prime in the modern era he probably wouldn't get a Super Rugby contract. That doesn't mean Mark Reddish is a better lock than Colin Meads was...... [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
Who's better? Lomu or Savea?
Top