George North and Jonah Lomu

Sorry to any welsh fans out there but i recently read on bbc sport that the young, powerful winger has been compared to perhaps the greatest winger of all time and was announced as Rugby's first superstar Jonah Lomu. This is the biggest piece of tripe i have heard in a long time. North at 6'3 and 17 stone is no doubt an imposing winger but to compare him to one of the all time greats, a man at 6'5, weighing over 19 stone and running the 100m under 11 seconds needs their brain testing and to make this claim so early on is ludricrous.
I can only think that as they were both very young in their debut world cups this has given GN the lomu tag. To his credit GN it seems can hardly believe it either and respectfully says "To be compared to Jonah is a massive honour," said Wales wing North.
"To me personally, I don't think I've done enough to deserve that yet." He is undoubtedly a good young talent and it is incredible he has played just 14 matches for the scarlet's and gained 14 caps for Wales. He is a talent for sure but to even put him in the same sentence as Jonah IMO is unjust on a player who will never ever be forgotten!
Thoughts?

I think every large winger who comes along gets described as the new Lomu. Its just part of the obsession with drawing in legends which is part and parcel of journalism for the masses.

I also think if Lomu came lalong now as exactly the player he was on debut he wouldnt stand out as anything special. In his day though he was a revelation and a sign of where back play was going, most notably when literaly running through Underwood.

I think it was more that they were both pretty much unknowns in the rugby world and then both really made a name for themselves at the RWC with next to no caps. North is now the RWCs youngest ever try scorer and also I believe that George has scored something rediculous like 9 tries in 12 international matches, which is a pretty impressive strike rate considering (and not some of those have appearences have been off the bench too).

That said nearly every young lad who plays on the wing and is bigger than 6" gets compared to Lomu, the same as an midget winger will be compared to Shane Williams. Rather sad really but that is how things go.

Maybe they are referring to George not being Welsh by birth, the same way Jonah is not a Kiwi by birth?



Sorry... couldn't resist that one.

Metal Tiger wrote:Maybe they are referring to George not being Welsh by birth, the same way Jonah is not a Kiwi by birth?



Sorry... couldn't resist that one.

Nice try. Jonah was born in Auckland though

Metal Tiger wrote:Maybe they are referring to George not being Welsh by birth, the same way Jonah is not a Kiwi by birth?



Sorry... couldn't resist that one.

Even though Lomu was born in Auckland.

Being compared to someone doesn't necessarily mean the comparer thinks they are as good as him. I could be compared to Jonah Lomu. "Compared to Jonah Lomu Mckay1402 is a rubbish winger."

Perhaps they just mean that they saw similar potential in GN that they saw in Jonah at the same age.

I think North has a fantastic skill set and is very mobile and quick for such a big lad.

As mentioned above Lomu would have been less likely to have the same impact had he come on the scene now but on the other hand we might not have seen such huge players had he not been around.

In conclusion North is not a Lomu yet but then in 1994 Lomu wasn't either.

mckay, thats true we had the same argument when someone flip[ped out over Haskell being desribed as "a bit like" Mccaw by the Safrican chap on ITV.

Jonah Lomu's name is 5 letters, followed by 4 letters.

George North is 6 followed by 5

Therefore George North is Jonah Lomu + 1

QED

North has broken onto the scene with 9 tries in 12 matches, youngest ever world cup try scorer, a big guy with pace, power, good handling and great footwork. Has undoubted potential and is a threat nearly everytime he touches the ball.

Want to compare that with a description of Lomu the first time he appeared at the World Cup and then tell me if the comparison is so ridiculous? He's not comparing North to the Lomu we all came to be in awe of, hes comparing the players at a similar time in their respective careers....

And Pete, what you on about, the brand only knows one thing on a rugby pitch, DOMINATION! (thank you d24tress for those diarys)

sorry seabiscuit i dont agree that he wouldnt be seen as anything special. Yes the defences have improved but you see players all the time today being smashed backwards from attempted tackles and sent flying by hand offs.
But with that much strength and speed no way would he be instantly nullified. The best wingers of the world today atm are few and far between IMO as there arent many huge wingers nowadays.
The closest winger to lomu size wise is alesana tuilagi who at times is virtually unstoppable and yet he isnt nearly as pacy as the great man. On the crash ball he would need a good two players to bring him down and one on one with wingers today he would smash most of them.
So for you to say that about jonah not having much of a impact is madness!

im sorry but i dont think these 2 can be compared..Lomu was world class, and a quality player, i dont think north is in the same league as lomu.

mckay1402 wrote:
In conclusion North is not a Lomu yet but then in 1994 Lomu wasn't either.

If Lomu wasn't Lomu in 1994, then who was he?

It's ludicrous to compare North or anyone else to Lomu. Lomu was a one off, a giant of a man who bounced backs and forwards around like skittles. I recall him running, jogging even, with Martin Johnson, Jason Leonard and Graham Roundtree all hanging off him and he still bounced Dean Richards off. The commentater at the time said it was like watching a man play under 14's schoolboy rugby.

North is a big strong lad with pace but Lomu was something else.

cricketfan90 wrote:im sorry but i dont think these 2 can be compared..Lomu was world class, and a quality player, i dont think north is in the same league as lomu.

You just compared them .....

cricketfan90 wrote:im sorry but i dont think these 2 can be compared..Lomu was world class, and a quality player, i dont think north is in the same league as lomu.

Howabout comparing them at their respective first world cups? Not after Lomu had been recognised and lauded as the best back in the world. Obviously theres no comparison to North and that Lomu, but at their respective first World Cups, sure why not?

Comfort wrote:Howabout comparing them at their respective first world cups?

1995 was Lomu's 1st RWC and he almost singlehandedly demolished every team he faced.

roddersm wrote:

Comfort wrote:Howabout comparing them at their respective first world cups?

1995 was Lomu's 1st RWC and he almost singlehandedly demolished every team he faced.

North has had a major impact against every team he has come up against. And you could also argue that he was the main force in the demolition of Fiji, scoring once and setting up two or three. And also made a huge impact off the bench against Namibia.

No body is comparing the 2 other than the media hacks looking to write a cheesy story rather than do some proper work.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:
North has had a major impact against every team he has come up against. And you could also argue that he was the main force in the demolition of Fiji, scoring once and setting up two or three. And also made a huge impact off the bench against Namibia.

No he hasn't. He had very little impact against SA.

Having a good game against Fiji and Namibia, who were both awful sides with nothing to play for, is incomparible to Lomu absolutely destroying England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales in the 1995 RWC.

This is insane. It's akin to saying Keith Earls is the next Christian Cullen for scoring couple of nice tries against Russia and Italy.

Hape is the new BOD!

BATH_BTGOG wrote:Hape is the new BOD!

To be honest I've read more stupid comments on this thread....

Well i'll just agree aswell everyone big seems to get compared to him these days....even the Jersey Juggernaught...which is laughable.

So no not a Lomu...i dont think there'll ever be someone like him again....and its sad that he's ill again.

But give North some credit...for a young lad he's playing some pretty good intelligent rugby...and shows that he can actually play and not rely on his size....

roddersm wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:
North has had a major impact against every team he has come up against. And you could also argue that he was the main force in the demolition of Fiji, scoring once and setting up two or three. And also made a huge impact off the bench against Namibia.

No he hasn't. He had very little impact against SA.

Having a good game against Fiji and Namibia, who were both awful sides with nothing to play for, is incomparible to Lomu absolutely destroying England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales in the 1995 RWC.

This is insane. It's akin to saying Keith Earls is the next Christian Cullen for scoring couple of nice tries against Russia and Italy.

yep all his tries have been against Namibia and Fiji.

That English lad North is talented, and I like the fact that he goes looking for the ball, but Lomu was just something different.

Never say never but its unlikely a player will come along and blow the sport away again like Lomu did.

GeordieFalcon wrote:
But give North some credit...for a young lad he's playing some pretty good intelligent rugby...and shows that he can actually play and not rely on his size....

He's a brilliant young player, one of the wingers of the tournament. However is impact on this tournament so far, which amounts to a man of the match display against the worst Fiji side we've seen in years and a few tries against a part time Namibia side is not even comparable with Lomu's in 1995.

If he runs through the entire Irish backline, twice, in that act of scoring on Saturday then we can start drawing the comparisons.

I wish that face palm thing was still available.

Of course North hasnt made an impact at all.

If you look at Lomu's play in the groupstages (bearing in mind he plays for the all blacks) its comparable to North's play in the group stages (who plays for wales).

Whether or not its a positive comparison in your opinion isnt the point, it is comparable.

it takes someone with a very very very very very low understanding of what a comparison is to say they cannot be compared.

thats the point.

Roddersm - Ok yes he didn't do anything 'special' against SA, but he played well. Also I am not comparing him to Lomu myself, I am just trying to explain where the comparison can come from. North has been one of the stand out players (IMO) this RWC. He is now the youngster player to have scored a try at the RWC. He has scored 9 tries in 12 outings for his nation (he has only played 14 matches regional matches so far in his career). I guess what other player would you compare North to who was playing at the same standard and leve at the same age? I don't think anyone here is saying that North is as good as, or superior to, Lomu, or that he will be (only time will tell), but more that he is having a pretty good start in a similar style.

Comfort wrote:
If you look at Lomu's play in the groupstages (bearing in mind he plays for the all blacks) its comparable to North's play in the group stages (who plays for wales).

No it isn't.

why not?

Go back and watch the group games from 1995 and it will become very apparent.

They are very similar in that they never scored against Wales

They are very similar in that they never scored against Wales. Apparently Flood control is active on this forum. I would have thought he'd have been too busy with kicking practise

rodders, but you've seen them both, and compared their appearances.

it just so happens its not a positive comparison in Norths favour.

doesnt mean you cant compare them, for fRSTHJNMKATFGADHN sake.

I'm sorry but i fail to see what the hype is about . North Scored against Fiji and Namibia. Wasnt present against SA and was ineffective against Samoa . Hype him up all you want ,all thats served is just making teams assign two tacklers to him and shut him down

Comfort wrote:rodders, but you've seen them both, and compared their appearances.

it just so happens its not a positive comparison in Norths favour.

doesnt mean you cant compare them, for fRSTHJNMKATFGADHN sake.

The only comparison is that they both play rugby in the same position and were a similar age.

This thread is about as relevent as comparing Frank Bunce and Shontayne Hape. It's total nonsence.

Bullsbok

I think you may be forgetting his two tries on debut. Who did he score them against?

McKay - it must have been a weakened SA side, the same as it was a weakened Fiji side, and a poor Namibia. Lets face it North wears a red shirt so whatever he does do on the feild is only down to pure luck, or the opposition not playing up to their own standards.

mckay1402 wrote:Bullsbok

I think you may be forgetting his two tries on debut. Who did he score them against?

Against the Springboks. forgive me i might have remembered if the Boks went on to lose due to those two tries. Or if they were as memorable as Shane williams stepping 5 players on his way to the tryline against the Boks in 08 .

North is the first player to ever score two tries on debut against SA. 500 players have made their debut agaisnt SA and 34 of them have scored tries but only George North has ever scored two. He is also the youngest player ever to score two tries against a major rugby nation and the youngest player ever to score at a world cup.

"Comparison: is the act of comparing one thing to another, in order to determine similarities and differences, relative size, relative importance, etc"

You can compare so many aspects about them as players, just because Lomu was a one of a kind star, doesnt mean they cant be compared.

And no its not just their size/age.

Howabout their footwork? Speed? How they go looking for work? Defensive abilities? Kick returns? Use of set-piece attacks? (not necessarily saying these are their similarities, just a point that they can be compared).

It doesnt mean North has to go running through an entire backline, simply, because hes not Lomu, no-one is.

Doesnt mean comparing another player to Lomu is disrespectful or out of the ordinary.

I get that North wouldnt compare favourably, but to dismiss it out of hand is hilarious.

Bullsbok wrote:

mckay1402 wrote:Bullsbok

I think you may be forgetting his two tries on debut. Who did he score them against?

Against the Springboks. forgive me i might have remembered if the Boks went on to lose due to those two tries. Or if they were as memorable as Shane williams stepping 5 players on his way to the tryline against the Boks in 08 .

He scored two tries in a losing team. That makes it even more of an achievement. I'm not saying he's had the same impact as Lomu but people seem so keen to write him off because he plays for Wales. If you take off the blinkers (not directed at you Bullsbok) you will see that North is a very talented player with an extremely bright future.

Also lets not forget that Shane Williams didn't set the world alight when he came on the scene but look at him now. recognised as one of the greatest wingers ever...ever!

Why can't you guys just be happy that you've unearthed a talented young player, without hyping him out of all proportion? He's had a great start to his international career and has huge potential but its very early days.

You are starting to sound like the English when Chris Ashton scored a few tries against Italy .

roddersm wrote:Why can't you guys just be happy that you've unearthed a talented young player, without hyping him out of all proportion? He's had a great start to his international career and has huge potential but its very early days.

You are starting to sound like the English when Chris Ashton scored a few tries against Italy .

haha rodders, I agree with you that North isnt Lomu, at all.

but theres so much more that you can compare about the players than just that. so its perhaps not as ridiculous a comparison as it first sounds.

chill out though dude, i think the upcoming QFs are getting to us all!

Roddersm - nobody is trying to hype him at all. All anyone is doing is trying to point out that there are some reasonable similarities between North and Lomu that could be compared. We are not saying that he is the best winger in the world, we are not saying he is the best youngster in the world, and we are not saying he is the next Lomu.

I saw Lomu play for Cardiff. He wasn't very good that night. made the mistake that led to Edinburghs winning try. was awesome to be that close to the great man though

Comfort wrote:
chill out though dude, i think the upcoming QFs are getting to us all!

I hope North isn't too much like Lomu anyway...we had enough of him in 1995 ..

mckay1402 wrote:I saw Lomu play for Cardiff. He wasn't very good that night. made the mistake that led to Edinburghs winning try. was awesome to be that close to the great man though

we used to train up UWIC (national league basketball) at the time he was playing for Cardiff and we used to see him regurlarly, always an absolute gent and took a few minutes to have a laugh with us all, and even then he was a huge, huge, intimdating man, until you spoke to him, and yeah, gent!

mckay1402 wrote:I saw Lomu play for Cardiff. He wasn't very good that night. made the mistake that led to Edinburghs winning try. was awesome to be that close to the great man though

I was gutted I wasn't able to make it when he came to Stradey, my mum went instead.

It's fnuny how many people rate Lomu as the best winger of all time. I think that there are a hell of a lot of left wingers that are far more complete players.

But as a weapon? No way. Jonah was probably the most destructive weapon any team has ever had.

disneychilly wrote:It's fnuny how many people rate Lomu as the best winger of all time. I think that there are a hell of a lot of left wingers that are far more complete players.

But as a weapon? No way. Jonah was probably the most destructive weapon any team has ever had.

Couldn't agree more. Campese was a much better winger but Lomu was just a force.