How Many World Class Players are there in your National team.

First topic message reminder :

Lets define the often maligned, much used phrase "World Class" as being a player who is in the top three in their position in World rugby.

There may well be players recently retired or overlooked by national selectors that you rate in the best of the best.

Yea he's really looked world class this season

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Yea he's really looked world class this season

And sure to continue to do so..!

I wonder if teams outside the top 3 can claim to have world class players.

GloriousEmpire wrote:I wonder if teams outside the top 3 can claim to have world class players.

Possibly one or two but if they had half a dozen in the top 36 surely they would be top 3/4 ?

GloriousEmpire wrote:I wonder if teams outside the top 3 can claim to have world class players.

Here we go.....

H
It seems to me the top 3 are normally occupied by the best attacking side, the most physical "10 man team" and the best balanced über side. Normally NZ, Australia and South Africa. Sometimes England pip the saffers and sometimes France sneak in there. Transitionally the order is gazumped. But to suggest Wales, Ireland or any other non top 3 side have any more than one fringe world class player each is preposterous.

Samoa, Fiji, Italy, pumas probably have one each - you do the maths.

Depends what we call world class. I still think top 3 in any position is too easy. Would have to make or pressure a space in a World 23 at least, so in a position where only 2 players would conceivably be picked in that team, there are only 2 world class players (eg, right now FB)

A world class player has been defined to be top 3 in his position by the OP.

That's 45 players.

To suggest that all 45 positions are filled by the top 3 sides would kind of suggest these 3 teams would never get beat by any team out of this group.

We know this isn't the case

Corbs, Cole, Tuilagi and possibly the Youngs brothers. In a year's time I would hope to be adding Launchbury, Morgan and Farrell to that.

Personally I think the "three best in each position" rule is a bit arbitrary, as it sets the number of "world class" players at any given time as being exactly 45, which seems bizarre. I would want to be a bit more flexible than that, as you could have generations where there were plenty of similarly talented players in the same position, all plausibly called world class. Flanker would be one area like that.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:
To suggest that all 45 positions are filled by the top 3 sides would kind of suggest these 3 teams would never get beat by any team out of this group.

Not necessarily. Quins are arguably man-for-man at least as strong as Exeter in every position, for example, but they nailed us twice this season.

thomh wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:
To suggest that all 45 positions are filled by the top 3 sides would kind of suggest these 3 teams would never get beat by any team out of this group.

Not necessarily. Quins are arguably man-for-man at least as strong as Exeter in every position, for example, but they nailed us twice this season.

There's a reason kids are taught Rock Paper Scissors- it's to demonstrate the apparently illogical and yet clearly true (and on a deeper level far far more logical) rule that many people seemed to have failed to learn: A beats B and B beats C does not mean A beats C. Different styles suit different opponents

GloriousEmpire wrote:I wonder if teams outside the top 3 can claim to have world class players.

Plenty undisputdedly do.

You have to consider that the best teams in the world are teams, not necsarily just the best individual players. As a unit they are the best.

Even the most devout kiwi or South African fan would not suggest that their side contains fifteen World Class players. The Aussies do not after their recent series.

I think he was trying it on Maest

Maesteg knows that

Treat a fellow poster with some civility and they should respond likewise.

We have had some interesting contributions to this thread so far.

A fair point has been raised on World class players in the smaller nations.

Khan Foutaali, Parisse and Zanni have been mentioned, Nalanga suggested there are surely many more.

There are several more, Mamuka Gorgodze is an unstoppable force of nature (not quite WC because 6 is so competitive, but could be)

Argentina have had a few in their time.

Pichot springs to mind

Fernadez Lobbe, Hugo Porta, Hernandez circa 2007 RWC...

Perhaps we should ask the extremely unbiased Jonathan Davies for
'Numbers!'

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:Perhaps we should ask the extremely unbiased Jonathan Davies for
'Numbers!'

Comedy is not your career path Trev.

ChequeredJersey wrote:Pichot springs to mind

Samoa have a number of lads around the fringes, Census Johnson possibly top three.

The problem with the top 3 definition of world class is that the top 3 could be relatively poor right now but since they are still the best 3 they are world class. This clashes with the idea of a world class player being a consistently awesome player.

eg Aaron Smith - new, played some very good games then went to pieces and took a while to get back to some semblance of form so inconsistent. Unfortunately may still be one of the top 3 half backs cause noone else is consistently much better.
So sort of world class without being a champion top player

Agreed whereas you could take blindside flanker and say there are a lot of world class options there. But just like a national team, you're going to have strength in depth in certain areas and look quite sketchy in others.

The thing that's struck me in this thread is you'd think with all the teams considered, you'd be hard pressed to include everybody but it seems that in some positions it's harder to say who is really up to the task. Which I guess is what every individual team faces. I'm just surprised at how many positions lack strength in depth in world rugby at the moment, at least in terms of world class players.

I'm not sure Smith is in the top 3 in the world in his position (Genia, Parra and Pienarr at least ahead of him) but I agree with your general point

I wonder how much that patchy distribution of world class players reflects the random distribution of genius and how much it says something about the current structure and tactics of the game.

We don't seem to have much difficulty finding candidates at 10 (heck, New Zealand can probably make a decent claim to have three just on their own), but 9 is much more fraught. There are a few acknowledged candidates at 7 but a long, long queue at 6.

I think that might reflect the way the game is at the moment. The refereeing of the breakdown is fraught (if there's one thing that I took from the Lions series, it's that in the 2nd and 3rd tests we had two very good referees who nevertheless viewed the game in entirely different ways - and that has to be fixed), which means that excelling as an out-and-out 7 requires a very distinct combination of physical attributes, skill and, frankly, a kind of mystique that enables the best to get away with stuff that others don't.

Likewise, decision-making around the breakdown for a scrum half has become much more complicated, and the margins for success or failure are much finer. Genia is probably best at it but can be contained with the right gameplan. Phillips changes the dynamic of that context, but again can be nullified. Youngs is excellent on the front foot but vulnerable when he has limited space.

The job of a blindside is in theory more complex (think of Richard Hill) but the default is "if in doubt, tackle" and we are inclined to celebrate those who do that default well (as an aside, it was comical in the JRWC final to watch all the Welsh lads trying to tackle like Lydiate, even when it might not have been the best choice for the situation).

Likewise, fly half is theoretically the critical position from which games are won or lost, but in the end it boils down to a very sophisticate bit of pattern recognition: being able to make the right judgement call among a fairly small set of options (kick? if so, where? pass? if so, to whom and when? run? if so, where's the space?). The very best fly halves have an eye for where the space is and how best to get the ball to it (and, unless they are Gregor Townsend, how to get their team mates there as well), but the decision tree itself seems to have stayed fairly constant for a decade or so, whereas the choices for scrum halves have become more complex.

Poorfour I agree with you entirely

I don't think the "best 3 in position" rule is correct at all. I think it's perfectly possible for there to be no "world class" players at any given time. Sometimes sports just go through a barren patch - look at heavyweight boxing as an example, or football in the late 90s (Zidane aside).

There are a handful at the moment. Some obvious ones in the forwards like Adam Jones, McCaw and Parisse, and backs like Genia and Carter, who would be great players in any era. Probably a few more as well. Suggestions of Cole and Corbisiero are premature in my opinion - both have more to do to earn that label, and Tuilagi certain does.

funnyExiledScot wrote:I don't think the "best 3 in position" rule is correct at all. I think it's perfectly possible for there to be no "world class" players at any given time. Sometimes sports just go through a barren patch - look at heavyweight boxing as an example, or football in the late 90s (Zidane aside).

There are a handful at the moment. Some obvious ones in the forwards like Adam Jones, McCaw and Parisse, and backs like Genia and Carter, who would be great players in any era. Probably a few more as well. Suggestions of Cole and Corbisiero are premature in my opinion - both have more to do to earn that label, and Tuilagi certain does.

FES

Just trying to find a fitting criteria for good discussion, hense three as the stipulation. Your point has plenty of merit...!

Would be interesting to see your WC XV..?

1.Woodcock 2.Du Plessis 3.A Jones 4.AWJ 5.Whitelock 6.Kaino 7.McCaw 8.Parisse 9.Genia 10.Carter 11.North 12.Fofana 13.C Smith 14.JP Pietersen 15.Dagg

16.Domingo 17.Moore 18.Franks 19.Etzebeth 20.Read 21.A Smith 22.Sexton 23.Halfpenny

That would be my current World XV. I'd suggest most of the 1st XV are "world class", with a few from the bench. David Pocock the most unlucky to be omitted. I think he's a "world class" player also.

funnyExiledScot wrote:1.Woodcock 2.Du Plessis 3.A Jones 4.AWJ 5.Whitelock 6.Kaino 7.McCaw 8.Parisse 9.Genia 10.Carter 11.North 12.Fofana 13.C Smith 14.JP Pietersen 15.Dagg

16.Domingo 17.Moore 18.Franks 19.Etzebeth 20.Read 21.A Smith 22.Sexton 23.Halfpenny

That would be my current World XV. I'd suggest most of the 1st XV are "world class", with a few from the bench. David Pocock the most unlucky to be omitted. I think he's a "world class" player also.

Nice team mate...! Would love to see them play together...!

I wonder if we will ever see the likes of a World XV vs International teams again...?

maestegmafia wrote:I wonder if we will ever see the likes of a World XV vs International teams again...?

Depends who you ask. A fair few on here seem to think that each time Wales takes the field you have a World XV vs International team.....  

To be fair FES, on our day......

On topic (and sticking with the top 3 rule) I'd go with.....

Adam Jones
AWJ
North
J.Davies
Halfpenny

admittedly AWJ/Davies were borderline calls and both have strong competition for what would be the 3rd spot.

I would likely go for not to different a team to yours



1 Crocket
2 Straus
3 A. Jones
4 AW Jones
5 Whitelock
6 Messam
7 Todd
8 Parisse
9 Genia
10 Carter
11 North
12 Fofana
13 Smith
14 Folau
15 Halfpenny

16 Du Plesis
17 Corbisiero
18 Cole
19 Etzbeth
18 Warburton
19 Smith
20 Sexton
21 Dagg

Crockett, Messam, Todd in a world XV?!?!?!

Crockett would be lucky to be in a top 10 of LH's....

Can someone please tell me what im missing with AWJ....?

I just dont get how he's a "world class " player?

Totally agree GF, he had a tidy Lions series but is a pretty average lock imo.

As I said earlier, World Class implies beyond Lions or Int Class- if we were playing Mars etc at rugby it would be the team you picked

A world XV implies the best in their position so MUST be a starter for their respective International teams.

Players like Kaino, Crockett would are not even 1st choice for NZ so unsure how they'd make a world XV. My crack...

1. Corbisiero (no real standout, when he plays he's great)
2. BdP (out a while but out on his own at hook)
3. Jones (not great around pitch but great scrummager)
4. Etzebeth (tough call but such an athlete)
5. POC (Whitelock close but physicality and lineout immense POC)
6. Alberts (a poor position tbh, Ferris?? Issue for AB's)
7. McCaw (who else?)
8. Read (constantly outstanding)

9. Genia (even when he's bad he's good)
10. Carter
11. Savea (some pretenders but great few years)
12. Fofana (standout for France)
13. Smith (AAC close)
14. North (normally 11 but awesome)
15. Halfpenny (Dagg close but Halfpenny v good of late)

Its all subjective, I think AWJ is Wales' best aggressive lock, like a POC-lite (obviously not as good) if you will. He's got a huge work-rate and puts a shift in better than most.
 
I'd take him over Parling every time for instance but I know every Englishman would say the opposite.
 
As for the topic of this thread (world class top 3) I think AWJ rates there, especially after leading the Lions to that victory of the Aussies in that manner, but I've said he's taken the 3rd spot in my list, and it's borderline, which it is.
 
Can someone tell me what I'm missing with Tuilagi?

"I'd take him over Parling every time for instance but I know every Englishman would say the opposite."

Different players, AWJ doesn't run the line. Parling doesn't do the hard graft like AWJ does as well.

Horses for courses, both aren't great imo.

Agree that 6 is a poor position. Some pretenders like Alberts, Kaino, Croft, Lydiate and SOB are all very closely matched, and Ben Mowen looks to have the makings of an excellent blindside, but whilst there are lots of players in the same bracket (and few like Brown, Wood and POM not far behind), there just isn't one standout "world class" performer.

Corbisiero needs to sustain form for me. Excellent for the Lions, but honestly how many would have included him before the 1st Lions Test. It takes more than two performances to jump the queue in my book. Woodcock and Domingo have been consistently excellent for a far longer period. There may be a "form" argument for Corbisiero (i.e. which may be eclipsed by the impending Rugby Championship), but he isn't yet in the same bracket as Woodcock and Domingo for my money.

Corbisiero has been fantastic when he's turned out Exiled, most England fans would have had him right up there for a few years.

Woodcock is past it imo

I think AWJ is Wales' best aggressive lock, like a POC-lite (obviously not as good) if you will. He's got a huge work-rate and puts a shift in better than most.

I'd take him over Parling every time for instance but I know every Englishman would say the opposite.

I wouldnt have Parling either...but i certainly dont see AWJ as a big aggressive POC like. He's a worker / grafter...actually reminds me of a better Maurice Botha at Sarries.
Im sure wales have better SR's.

Corbisiero needs to sustain form for me. Excellent for the Lions, but honestly how many would have included him before the 1st Lions Test.

If he had been fit, i for one would have had him starting the Lions...he's been standout for England for a few years now. And he's getting better and better.

Hmmm, I still think hindsight is a wonderful thing. I don't remember many tears when Corbisiero was omitted from the initial Lions squad. He's only played for England since Feb 2011 - I wouldn't say that constitutes a "few years". More like 1.5 seasons.

Pre-Lions first test, I didn't see anyone describing Corbisiero as "world class", or including him in world XVs. That's different from rating him a very good player.

Corbs was injured so wasn't considered, I for one had him as a shoe in last year along with Healy.

Most England fans have rated him highly for a while, he just doesn't get hyped up too much as he's alway injured.

funnyExiledScot wrote:Hmmm, I still think hindsight is a wonderful thing. I don't remember many tears when Corbisiero was omitted from the initial Lions squad. He's only played for England since Feb 2011 - I wouldn't say that constitutes a "few years". More like 1.5 seasons.

Pre-Lions first test, I didn't see anyone describing Corbisiero as "world class", or including him in world XVs. That's different from rating him a very good player.

I am pretty sure I mentioned him as a contender though through his injuries he was left out in many people's thoughts on selection.

Cracking player and with Youngs, Cole, Launbury and Parling England could have a very tidy front five for a long while.

Lose Parling and we could