John Gallagher

In the last few weeks we English have been subjected to Wum and ridicule regarding the inclusion of NZ born players in our squad.
I would just like to ask the kiwi's and GG on here if they think NZ would have won the World Cup (lite) without the services of the Londoner John Gallagher?
His record in that home competition was very impressive. He only played 18 matches for the All Blacks, but still managed 13 tries – including five in the 1987 tournament.

I recon Hape and his mates need to up it quite a bit in order to repay Blighty for lending the South Londoner to NZ , what do you think?

By no means the only overseas player capped by All Blacks,
Des Connor 12 caps each Wallabies/All Blacks best Scrum half ever bar none.[that i`ve seen].
Jamie Salmon capped by the All Blacks afterwards by England,Martin Johnson could have been capped by them too.

if the ABs hadn't selected Gallagher, (who was aWellington policeman,as opposed to a travelling rugby journeyman) they would have selected Lydsay Harris, waitemata,Auckland.who would have done just as good a job.

emack2 wrote:By no means the only overseas player capped by All Blacks

No shi1t Sherlock ! Plenty of South Seas Island players in the NZ sides of recent years. And before some of you try and claim some mock racist intent, please see this web page: http://www.serevirugby.com/serevi/

I never knew Serevi played for the All Blacks.

aucklandlaurie wrote: I never knew Serevi played for the All Blacks.

I don't recall anyone saying he did.

tigerleghorn wrote:
I would just like to ask the kiwi's and GG on here if they think NZ would have won the World Cup (lite) without the services of the Londoner John Gallagher?

Yes, they would have.

Aside from which he'd been in the country for more than 5 minutes, so is hardly in the same boat as Hape, Flutey, Paul, Vainakolo, Waldrom, Fourie, or any of the other foreign mercenaries that England have drafted into their squad over the last few years.

To answer your other question, we already trained MJ for you, provide half the players in the premiership and a range of mid field and back row options for your national squad. So I think any debt has been repaid handsomly, a few times over.

Trained MJ and provide half the players in the Prem?

Consistently inaccurate with average wummery as ever GG

I thought from your article that you were intent on provoking a reply along those lines.

Still it's invariably a Kiwi who wins the AP player of the year, and we did train MJ for you. In fact if not for NZ, he wouldn't have played rugby at all.

TheGreyGhost wrote: In fact if not for NZ, he wouldn't have played rugby at all.

You do type some poopie and you do border on ignorance.

nottins wrote:
This post was made by nottins who is currently on your ignore list. Display this post.

GG you dullard, are you suggesting that MJ just went to NZ on holiday and watched a game and said to himself "I recon I'd like a go at that, never seen this game before" and it all started in NZ?

I believe he was playing american football when he was spotted by AB legend Colin Meads who convinced him to go try out for an NZ provincial team. He learned his craft playing for King Country and the junior ABs.

I think he only came back to England on Holiday because of some silly Kiwi girlfriend who wanted to see the world.

So in fact, he was just in England on holiday.

Spouting your usual drivel I see TGG. Your comments really do border on ignorance

Martin Johnson was invited down to play for Tihoi by John Albert who'd seen him play for England Schools in Australia.

In Johnson's own words, "If I was ever going to make it as a full international, I wanted it to be in white, not black."

But obviously has now had a change of heart regarding the shirt colour

TheGreyGhost wrote:Aside from which he'd been in the country for more than 5 minutes, so is hardly in the same boat as Hape, Flutey, Paul, Vainakolo, Waldrom, Fourie, or any of the other foreign mercenaries that England have drafted into their squad over the last few years.

Gallagher had been living in NZ for 2 years before he was selected for the AB. Hape had been living in England for 7 years before he was selected for the national squad, Flutey 3 years, Paul 9 years, Vainikolo 5 years, Fourie 5 years. The only player on your list who has spent less time in England than Gallagher did in NZ before his selection is Waldrom, but then as your wording alludes, he hasn't played for England.


tigerleghorn, why bother with a post of this ilk? If you don't think much of WUM posts regarding England players, why reply in kind?

nottins wrote:
This post was made by nottins who is currently on your ignore list. Display this post.

I have no idea what you're saying Nottins, but I'm sure it borders on ignorance.

What exactly isd the point of this article,John Gallagher,born in England,of Irish parentage plays for NZ.Michael Jones born in NZ plays for NZ,but is of Polynesian stock.Qualification laws were the same for ALL as they are now,WOW some genius.
Worked out a large Number of All Blacks,are Pacific Islanders by birth or heritage.
Last time I looked NZ was a Pacific Island,and most were either born or raised at an early age there.NOT tha All Poaching again bit,get original PLEASE.
You are making the point that one Player,no matter how good would have made a difference in 1987.Jus t because he was qualified for England and Ireland.?
If you wanted to be pedantic most of Western Samoa side were NZ born
in the 1987 team.

NZ were 20 points better than anyone in that tournament. So to answer the OP's question, NO.

Ixnay on the South Sea Islands say too, KRD will have ya.

disneychilly wrote:NZ were 20 points better than anyone in that tournament. So to answer the OP's question, NO.

Ixnay on the South Sea Islands say too, KRD will have ya.

they wouldn't have been twenty points better than the boks of that era. Botha gerber du plesis wright and schimdt etc what a final that would have been

Anyone who knows gallagher would know that he would never declare for England. At worst he was an Irishman with the misfortune of being born in England who declared for nz. Did well with them and good luck to him

Seems odd then for someone who is so Irish and apparently anti-English to have spent all his time in England since returning in the 80's(but then I guess there are lots of Kiwi's on here who love to knock England at every opportunity but are happy to make their home and living here right GG?)

I believe JG is currently involved in Missionary work as a Head Teacher in London,I wonder when he plans to move to Ireland?

Typical English mercenary if you ask me. Imagine being born in London and going off looking to represent NZ at rugby.

Don't worry Tigerleghorn. NZ and even France are doing their bit.

Nephew of Joe Stanley, Sam Stanley is in the Saracens Academy. Philippe Sella's son, Geoffrey Sella is in the Saracens Academy too.

Imagine an England centre partnership of those two! Especially if they are anything like their famous relatives!

There's no room in the English centers though for now!

England have their own home grown options in Tuilagi, Flutey and Shontayne hape.

The Greyghost why don't you give us Conrad Smith and we will give you back Flutey,Hape and even throw in Waldrom though he does have an English granny somewhere?

Would you be happy with that?

Everyone go easy on GreyGhost, this guy is under serious pressure as is every New Zealander, imagine if they fail to win it this time!

I can see Tonga putting in a few hard hits on Friday, injuries could easily de-rail the All Blacks chances, maybe you could ask to have Hape back?

The northern obsession with Pacific Island tackling is hilarious.

As far as injury concerns go, I'd be more worried about some of the filthy off the ball stuff the Aussies seem to be getting away with at the moment.

Tonga has the most red cards of any RWC team I believe, due to their style of tackling!

Just saying I expect there will be a few cheap shots at the All Blacks.

Mind you it would be a ready made excuse if France do you, again

I'm not sure we'll need excuses Hersh.

We are gracious hosts. It's a well observed cultural value stemming from the Maori people but inherited into the wider New Zealand cultural philosophy that everyone should have a turn at winning.

We won the first one, and have been trying to give everyone a go since. Look at the way we stood aside to allow Mandella's world cup dream. Bear witness that we even stepped aside to give the Poms a crack. Some of the more greedy countries of course seem to not share our sense of community spirit. We've been desperate to give the frogs a go, but no matter how we try, they manage to balls it up. This time we've put them in our group, so they'll get two cracks of the whip and not wear themselves out as we shepherd them to the next round.

DOD wrote:Anyone who knows gallagher would know that he would never declare for England. At worst he was an Irishman with the misfortune of being born in England who declared for nz. Did well with them and good luck to him

Hello Deaglan, funilly enough I do know him (well sort of). My brothers went to the school where he is headmaster. Whilst he supports the ABs which is understandable given that he played for them, England are very much his second team.

He is a top lad as well. My step father used to corner him for rugby chat everytime he got the oppoirtunity on the school run. Apparently Fitzpatrick used to banter him about swapping one Pom for another re Salmon

[quote="TheGreyGhost"]I believe he was playing american football when he was spotted by AB legend Colin Meads who convinced him to go try out for an NZ provincial team. He learned his craft playing for King Country and the junior ABs.

I think he only came back to England on Holiday because of some silly Kiwi girlfriend who wanted to see the world.

So in fact, he was just in England on holiday. [/quote

good wum

jb1973 wrote:

disneychilly wrote:NZ were 20 points better than anyone in that tournament. So to answer the OP's question, NO.

Ixnay on the South Sea Islands say too, KRD will have ya.

they wouldn't have been twenty points better than the boks of that era. Botha gerber du plesis wright and schimdt etc what a final that would have been

Well i believe they would have been.
The abs of 87 were streets ahead of the abs of 86 in terms of player abilities, coaching and performance.
86 had an awful cavaliers tour of SA- non ab side and one only sparsely supported by kiwis. and they didnt have the likes of jk jones or fitzy. Stars of the 87 cup. And SA only scraped in.
86 nz also lost to oz and france.
In 87 they were 20 points better than france who also beat oz. Nz also went on to thrash oz a month later in the bl. Cup and also remain unbeaten till 1990.
They were also in NZ where they had 100% support by fans players and government. Unlike 86.
So although they werent there logic suggests SA would have had to improve by 20 points during 87 from the wilderness of playing hardly any int. Rugby.
Its very unlikey they would have beaten the abs in 87. on eden park. They havnt before or since there. Why would thay have then?
But i guess we'll never know. Certainly aint the abs fault. They were waiting...

Taylorman wrote:

jb1973 wrote:

disneychilly wrote:NZ were 20 points better than anyone in that tournament. So to answer the OP's question, NO.

Ixnay on the South Sea Islands say too, KRD will have ya.

they wouldn't have been twenty points better than the boks of that era. Botha gerber du plesis wright and schimdt etc what a final that would have been

Well i believe they would have been.
The abs of 87 were streets ahead of the abs of 86 in terms of player abilities, coaching and performance.
86 had an awful cavaliers tour of SA- non ab side and one only sparsely supported by kiwis. and they didnt have the likes of jk jones or fitzy. Stars of the 87 cup. And SA only scraped in.
86 nz also lost to oz and france.
In 87 they were 20 points better than france who also beat oz. Nz also went on to thrash oz a month later in the bl. Cup and also remain unbeaten till 1990.
They were also in NZ where they had 100% support by fans players and government. Unlike 86.
So although they werent there logic suggests SA would have had to improve by 20 points during 87 from the wilderness of playing hardly any int. Rugby.
Its very unlikey they would have beaten the abs in 87. on eden park. They havnt before or since there. Why would thay have then?
But i guess we'll never know. Certainly aint the abs fault. They were waiting...

wasn't dalton first choice for the 87 world cup pre injury? not saying you were not the best side by a long way but france were robbed of a pen try (think was 3-3) at the time if that had been given who knows?

The SA side of 87 were a lot better than the french team who battered the ab's in nantes imo the ab side of 89 was a better team than 87 but at home I guess you would still proably have won but well never know either way

With respect Gentlemen,the New Zealand Cavaliers,was NOT a poor one
the result 3-1,with only one provincial loss besides.
The norm post 1956 NZ 3-1,1965 NZ 3-1,1981 NZ 2-1
1960 SA 2-1-1,SA 1970 3-1,1976 SA 3-1
A tour with 20 provincial teams softening the tourists up for the National side.IS a lot different to a one off match in a RWC.

Can't recall France being robbed of a penalty try and I was around very closely at the time. Any details? The result was convincing in any respect.

Andy Dalton was first pick but he got collared from behind in the jaw from that thug Van Heerden I think it was.

But Fitzy was the up and comer and slotted in so well Dalton wouldn't play for the ABs again anyway, Fitzy completely taking over by World cup end.

When SA came back it took them until the 95 world cup to produce a good team. Prior to 86 for NZ was 81, and that was also a loss at Eden Park so only the cavaliers- a half pie organised event filled with controversy, even though close, is evidence they may have competed- not enough to convince me a win in 87 at Eden park or other was likely, if even possible.

Of course SA wouldn't have been competitive, they never had the chance(or seldom had) to test themselves on the International circuit.

Had they enjoyed regular exposure for the three or four years leading to the 87 Comp then we might have seen a very capable Bokke team.

Quote GG : "we did train MJ for you. In fact if not for NZ, he wouldn't have played rugby at all."

Quote MJ : "I got lucky. I could've just played club rugby in the King Country but the province gave me a chance. In England I'd only played one club game and that was the week before a cup final and both teams used their second XV. But, in New Zealand, I ended up playing against teams like Auckland and, funnily enough, Argentina [in 1990]."

Shock horror! GG wrong again!. Johnson played before NZ and at Club level too!!

I didn't say he hadn't played before. I said NZ trained him for you.

But they didnt, did they? Not really. Even someone as blindly, slavishly nationalistic as you can see that. I dont doubt that his experiences of playing a couple of years in NZ (including making the national jnr side at the expense of some hapless actual NZ'er/Polynesian import) helped to broaden his game however but he was clearly a damngood rugger player already.

It's clear that MJ learned the substantial weight of his rugby ability in NZ and to try to claim otherwise is just foolish.

The fact that you've had to resort to some tired and discredited argument about NZ importing Polynesians just reveals how well beaten you are in this argument.

Now I suggest you call it day gracefully before you posts begin to border on ignorance.

Just saying that someone is beaten doesnt mean that they are GG. You will need to accept that if you ever want to actually win an arguement.

Explaiin how it is clear that MJ learned the substantial weight of his rugby ability in NZ.

As for the Polynesian comment. If you cant take it, may I suggest that you dont dish it out?

You suggesting to someone else to do anything gracefully is amusing so kudos for that. More of a dry joke than a slapstick one. Good to see you expanding your repertoire.

Well, if not for Meads, Johnson would have been a British American footballer who possibly dabbled in the odd game of rugby involved B teams.

He clearly learned his core skills in King Country and was developed by the junior AB programme, undeniably the best programme in the world based on results and the prolifery of super stars that it turns out.

Now it's either coincidental that MJ came through that same programme and went on to captain England, or it was something he learned while playing for B sides in English club games. I know what most rational people would think.

Just be thankful his kiwi girlfriend got itchy feet and he went on holiday to England, or he would never have represented England at all

TheGreyGhost wrote:Well, if not for Meads, Johnson would have been a British American footballer who possibly dabbled in the odd game of rugby involved B teams.

He clearly learned his core skills in King Country and was developed by the junior AB programme, undeniably the best programme in the world based on results and the prolifery of super stars that it turns out.

Now it's either coincidental that MJ came through that same programme and went on to captain England, or it was something he learned while playing for B sides in English club games. I know what most rational people would think.

Just be thankful his kiwi girlfriend got itchy feet and he went on holiday to England, or he would never have represented England at all

And then, as per usual GG resorts to his land of make believe, or more simply put lies (apart from the bit about the jnr AB programme being the best in the world which it is).

Johnson was already a very good rugby player. He played a bit of American football as a kid but rugby was always his main sport. It only takes the most basic research to see that the "American footballer to rugby player" angle is complete nonsense. Johnson was already a rugby player when he arrived in NZ, a rugby player who dabbled in other sports including swimming, cricket as well as American football.

He clearly was trained in NZ and only ended up playing for England due to going on holiday with his Kiwi girlfriend.

I'm not sure why you are still debating this point. It's just completely obvious. Unless you're suggesting that he was one of the few players to go through the junior ABs programme and not manage to learn anything; then mystically became an international lock on the basis of his dabbling in swimming and cricket and american football.

TheGreyGhost wrote:He clearly was trained in NZ and only ended up playing for England due to going on holiday with his Kiwi girlfriend.

I'm not sure why you are still debating this point. It's just completely obvious. Unless you're suggesting that he was one of the few players to go through the junior ABs programme and not manage to learn anything; then mystically became an international lock on the basis of his dabbling in swimming and cricket and american football.

Let me spell it out for you; MJ played rugby to a high level (county, age grade England, club etc) in England. He dabbled in other sports as people who like sport are prone to do. He went to NZ, ostensibly on a gap year to play rugby, they saw his talent and he stayed for another season representing the ABs school team because the Englishman was better than any of the Kiwi youths available. Another reason for staying on was because he had started going out with the daughter of the owners of the farm he was staying on whilst in NZ. He returned to England, with her to get a career in a bank (rugby was still amateur in the NH) ie not on holiday, and to continue playing for his beloved Leicester.

Now, I am clearly not debating (see previous posts) that his experience in NZ helped to broaden his game, as any such experience would (the same can be said of kiwi nationals coming to play in the AP). I am debating your assertations that MJ was an American footballer who was told about rugby by Colin Meads and persuaded to go down to NZ where he was taught abut rugby and sent back two years later as the finished article and ready to take over the England captaincy. That is just you taking your well worn seat in cloud cuckoo land and spouting your make believe twaddle! In your head its like a rugby version of the karate kid with Colin Meads playing the part of Mr Miagi.

Tigerleghorn ,I will treat you with respect that this thread is serous and not a wum.SA played international Rugby in 1984,including two tests against England,they also played a Rest of the World side in 1989.
It is certain they could have fielded a strong side in 1987,if the national community allowed them too.It is also one thing to win a Test series in a
old style Tour situation at home.
Then win a series of one off matches away,the assumption that because the Boks were`nt at 1987 RWC.It was less of an Honour.Strangely the
Aussies don`t discount there win in 1991,nor is it genarally discounted.
For ANYONE,and it is often NOT SA supporters to claim all the Boks had to do
was turn up in 1987and 1991 and they`ed have won them.Is unbeleivable
arrogance.Not only to NZ and Australia but to every other side that appeared in them
You DON`T win RWCs by just turning up!!!!!!

TheGreyGhost wrote:I invite you to remain in your clearly delusional world.

However the rest of the world can see that MJ was trained in NZ, and only ended up playing for England (like so many other foreigners to follow him) after picking up a club during a brief holiday to England.

Clearly MJ was lying when he wrote his autobiography! When you refer to "the rest of the world" presumably you actually mean "the rest of greyghost's fantasy world"

Taylorman wrote:Can't recall France being robbed of a penalty try and I was around very closely at the time. Any details? The result was convincing in any respect.

Andy Dalton was first pick but he got collared from behind in the jaw from that thug Van Heerden I think it was.

But Fitzy was the up and comer and slotted in so well Dalton wouldn't play for the ABs again anyway, Fitzy completely taking over by World cup end.

When SA came back it took them until the 95 world cup to produce a good team. Prior to 86 for NZ was 81, and that was also a loss at Eden Park so only the cavaliers- a half pie organised event filled with controversy, even though close, is evidence they may have competed- not enough to convince me a win in 87 at Eden park or other was likely, if even possible.

france had a scrum v the ab pack was being pushed over the line scrum collapsed deliberatley but no pen try awarded. I have no doubts the abs would have beaten france but imo it was a pen try and game would have been closer.

I thought dalton did a hamstring in the run up to the world cup?