BOD or Conrad?

First topic message reminder :

Sure, now Brian is past his peak and Conrad is currently the best centre in the game, but how will we judge them 10 years from now? When we look back at their careers, who will be judged the better the better of the two?

It's a tough question. O'Driscoll has been considered the best whilst Conrad has been pretty darn good, but since the world cup victory Conrad has gone to another level and questions have to be asked whether he has surpassed BOD as the premier centre of the professional era.

So my fellow rugby tragics, is Conrad #1 or does that title remain with BOD?

taylorman... perhaps there is an element of truth in what you say. BOD has always foremost been a bloodhound when the try line is in his sights, he's pretty relentless. Yet he's not a Chris Ashton, he does look for the other man if he doesn't back himself, remember Zebo's try vs. Wales and his flip back when he could have gone for the line himself?

Its sort of why I think BOD made it as a youngster (<25) whereas Smith didn't. Youngsters often come in for their raw pace, strength, aggression... their team skills often come later on in life with experience.

To me the wins don't come into it. BOD has had greater club rugby success and Smith has had greater test success. There are too many variables to explain why this should be the case and it's absurd to pin that on one individual player. I will say that given the players around them in their respective careers, more has been asked of Smith to provide solidity on defence and more has been asked of BOD for something special on attack. Which is not to say that the reverse has not been a strength of each players but, rather, the team dynamics ask more of those specific strengths of those players. With Nonu rushing up on defence, for example, someone has to plug those gaps whereas on attack NZ are often finding space on the counter attack so the key is not to punch the defensive line but to find width and space outside the players. BOD, on the other hand, has been able to rely on the defensive reliability of D'Arcy but I would argue those counter attacking opportunities are less and Ireland require more a combination of speed, power and guile to break the line and often this falls on the shoulders of BOD.

Comparing two players from different teams. Put Parisse in for Picamoles and you have two gifted players but who's to say the balance wouldn't be affected with respect to the players around them. Frankly, it's impossible to even compare two players from the same team but different eras. Frank Bunce or Conrad Smith? You tell me because Nonu and Little are two completely different players.

I get the feeling neither country would give up Smith or BOD respectively. It'd be impossible to imagine their team without them. Neither team for me has any answer to a possible replacement. Ben Smith will be probably in the 13 shirt and that's the best we can do. Ireland have shown life beyond BOD looks grim in the 13 shirt. That's why he's still soldiering on. A slower BOD is still better than anything else. Both countries will miss these players for different reasons. Smith just makes the right decisions which is not to say that BOD isn't capable of that. Smith doesn't look much as a physical specimen but he's able to drive back players much bigger than him. In his prime, BOD looked much bigger physically than Smith but could pick up a ball with one hand in the wet and do things with finesse that other bigger set players couldn't do.

Both players have a remarkable all-round skill set yet both have also specific strengths. The only way we can tell if a player is better than the other is if they play regularly for the same team in the same position. And if that hypothetical situation ever eventuated we wouldn't even be having this debate because if you don't regularly start for your team then you're not considered anything special. Ask Nick Evans.

There go the over protectors again...club and country blah blah...It is BODs individuality as a player that akes him a great player. Why? because hes had to take on other sides due to not having centre or whole team combinations capable of getting the points on the board. BODS best moments versus us is when he took the stuff you all Im going for it and did it all himself. That is what I mean by team versus individual.

NZ centres traditionally do take years to mature because the skill of managing the midfield space as a whole rather than as an individual takes experience. Experience in going up all the different types of midfields across the planet and working out the best way to combat each utilising the strengths of those very good players around them, a luxury BOD unfortunately did not have.

Joe Stanley, Bunce, Umaga and now Smith, all late developers but all combination rather than individual centres who honed the art of managing the midfield into a position of dominance in most cases. Its that aspect of Smiths wider scope of the position that is superior to BODs, and one that provides more consistency.

Taylorman wrote:There go the over protectors again...club and country blah blah...It is BODs individuality as a player that akes him a great player. Why? because hes had to take on other sides due to not having centre or whole team combinations capable of getting the points on the board. BODS best moments versus us is when he took the stuff you all Im going for it and did it all himself. That is what I mean by team versus individual.

NZ centres traditionally do take years to mature because the skill of managing the midfield space as a whole rather than as an individual takes experience. Experience in going up all the different types of midfields across the planet and working out the best way to combat each utilising the strengths of those very good players around them, a luxury BOD unfortunately did not have.

Joe Stanley, Bunce, Umaga and now Smith, all late developers but all combination rather than individual centres who honed the art of managing the midfield into a position of dominance in most cases. Its that aspect of Smiths wider scope of the position that is superior to BODs, and one that provides more consistency.

If you had one shred of evidence to back up that claim we might take you seriously,however you are just stating an opinion as fact.We've seen far more of BoD throughout his career and the idea that he isn't a team player is frankly stupid.This is a gut who started out as a young tyro scoring tries from everywhere,then injuries took the edge off his pace and he adapted to become the best defensive centre in the game,then he became known as an extra flanker because of his work at the breakdown and finally late in his career he has discovered that he has a talent for scoring important tries from close forward drives.

If he was individualistic as you think he wouldn't have adapted his game so much and so often to fit what his teammates and body were capable of.It's this ability to reinvent himself that for me makes him stand above all the others,Umaga and any of the others you care to mention only came good when at their physical peak but once the body started to go they were lost and unable to figure out a new way of playing.It'll be interesting to see if that happens Smith too.For me the NZ player that BoD has most in common with is McCaw,both of them have adapted their games over the years to suit the laws,the refs,their teams and their bodies,selfless team men to the core.

Taylorman

Always was puzzled by Frank Bunce... he was outstanding in 1991 with W. Samoa... better then what NZ had at the time in midfield in my opinion... and he played for W.Samoa because he wasn't good enough for NZ.... amazing that.

Now there was a centre.... and a half.

If Conrad Smith had been playing for the Lions no way would he have been dropped for JD2 or missed all those vital tackles in game 2.

GloriousEmpire wrote:If Conrad Smith had been playing for the Lions no way would he have been dropped for JD2 or missed all those vital tackles in game 2.

yep and I doubt you will find anyone that would disagree with that as Conrad Smith is currently seen as the best OC in the game.

But was he better than Smith fa?

Little and Bunce were my favourite centre combination but with a knife to my throat I'd admit Horan and Little were better. But are you able to really make those comparisons? What is that based on? Both pairings were legends for their teams. When you narrow it down to a player it's even more difficult. McCaw or Jones? They both have their advocates. It's all a bit of fun but it can so easily to degenerate into pigeon chesting and baboon onanism. It seems both corners are not prepared to throw in the towel for their respective players on this thread and that speaks to what kind of players they were for their sides as much as their individual talents.

Too often though these debates overlook that rugby is a team sport and that 15 individuals are not the makings of a team. Look at Australia at the moment. I wouldn't give up Smith for what he adds to the team and no doubt Ireland wouldn't do the same for BOD. I like parsnip, kumara, pumpkin and carrots as roasting vegetables (can't get the first two in Spain  ). You might like a totally different combination. Who am I to try to tell you you don't know what you're missing. I'd rather keep more for myself... if I could bloody get them. Any Kiwis planning a trip to Spain in the near future?

you cant get parsnip in Spain?? strange as you would be able to source that from France worst case.

GloriousEmpire wrote:If Conrad Smith had been playing for the Lions no way would he have been dropped for JD2 or missed all those vital tackles in game 2.

Game 2 of the Lions tour
Wednesday 5 June: Lions 69-17 Western Force - Paterson Stadium, Perth.

Try scorers: O'Driscoll (2), Sexton, Croft, Heaslip, Vunipola, Bowe, Farrell and Parling.

BOD wasn't dropped for anyone as a result of that performance.


Lets be honest you are not the sharpest tool in the box GE, but lets try to compare BOD at his prime not a man in his last season. The 2005 or 2009 version was a country mile ahead of Smith and I doubt very much anyone except for the one eyed or the "knock the door n run sniggering" would disagree with that.

As I said if SBW decided he seriously wanted to play 13 in union, then Smith would become a bit player warming the bench at most.

SBW would be at 12 flyhalf as he has already played at 13 and much like Nonu never convinced there. You're swinging the pendulum too far in that comment. Smith has guaranteed selection much like an injured McCaw is risked for the starting lineup against SA.

Whocares good to know concerning the parsnip. The turnip is the closest thing we have here and that is the Devil's root vegetable and all who eat it are living in sin.

Turnips are rotten alright. Didnt realise you couldnt get parsnips in Madrid!! Mind you I was probably too busy eating bocarones, atun claro, gaspacho and all of the other unbelievably high quality fruit, veg and fish there.

Thanks for posting something interesting Kia.

We must always make the most of what we have GG and not focus on what we don't. That leads to anger and hate, which inevitably leads to a turnip turning up on the dinner plate...

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Taylorman wrote:There go the over protectors again...club and country blah blah...It is BODs individuality as a player that akes him a great player. Why? because hes had to take on other sides due to not having centre or whole team combinations capable of getting the points on the board. BODS best moments versus us is when he took the stuff you all Im going for it and did it all himself. That is what I mean by team versus individual.

NZ centres traditionally do take years to mature because the skill of managing the midfield space as a whole rather than as an individual takes experience. Experience in going up all the different types of midfields across the planet and working out the best way to combat each utilising the strengths of those very good players around them, a luxury BOD unfortunately did not have.

Joe Stanley, Bunce, Umaga and now Smith, all late developers but all combination rather than individual centres who honed the art of managing the midfield into a position of dominance in most cases. Its that aspect of Smiths wider scope of the position that is superior to BODs, and one that provides more consistency.

If you had one shred of evidence to back up that claim we might take you seriously,however you are just stating an opinion as fact.We've seen far more of BoD throughout his career and the idea that he isn't a team player is frankly stupid.This is a gut who started out as a young tyro scoring tries from everywhere,then injuries took the edge off his pace and he adapted to become the best defensive centre in the game,then he became known as an extra flanker because of his work at the breakdown and finally late in his career he has discovered that he has a talent for scoring important tries from close forward drives.

If he was individualistic as you think he wouldn't have adapted his game so much and so often to fit what his teammates and body were capable of.It's this ability to reinvent himself that for me makes him stand above all the others,Umaga and any of the others you care to mention only came good when at their physical peak but once the body started to go they were lost and unable to figure out a new way of playing.It'll be interesting to see if that happens Smith too.For me the NZ player that BoD has most in common with is McCaw,both of them have adapted their games over the years to suit the laws,the refs,their teams and their bodies,selfless team men to the core.

I totally agree with asoreleftshoulder (albit I am not a biased BOD hero worshipper and me and asoreleftshoulder have stood our ground over BOD v Foxy in previous forum topics)....... BOD is so much more than an brilliant footballer, the way he motivates the dressing room prior to matches, his ability to read the game, defensively he is up there with the best and he never shies away from a tackle, he has a sublime foot and can drop a goal from almost anyway. Smith is a more defensive player thus perceived as a team player, I would rather see it as two players who in their prime had different abilities, BOD an outside centre because of his speed of foot/hand/mind and Smith because of his organisational/game management abilities.    

Impossible to compare the two really, BOD has been playing at a high level consistently for best part of 15 years, but in time I believe NH viewers will say BOD was the better player, and Smith will be seen as the better player in the SH.

Try telling that to my ex Kia. Was a daily battle trying to point out all the great things in life.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:SBW would be at 12 flyhalf as he has already played at 13 and much like Nonu never convinced there. You're swinging the pendulum too far in that comment. Smith has guaranteed selection much like an injured McCaw is risked for the starting lineup against SA.

Whocares good to know concerning the parsnip. The turnip is the closest thing we have here and that is the Devil's root vegetable and all who eat it are living in sin.

Apologies if that is incorrect but my mate who is usually clued up on these thing told me that Steve Tew (NZRU) has offered Williams a 3yr contract, with a view to play outside centre for Hamilton and the All Blacks in 2015 and the WC. Understand yes, he has played 12 during his previous times in Union.

Is this not the case?.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Taylorman wrote:There go the over protectors again...club and country blah blah...It is BODs individuality as a player that akes him a great player. Why? because hes had to take on other sides due to not having centre or whole team combinations capable of getting the points on the board. BODS best moments versus us is when he took the stuff you all Im going for it and did it all himself. That is what I mean by team versus individual.

NZ centres traditionally do take years to mature because the skill of managing the midfield space as a whole rather than as an individual takes experience. Experience in going up all the different types of midfields across the planet and working out the best way to combat each utilising the strengths of those very good players around them, a luxury BOD unfortunately did not have.

Joe Stanley, Bunce, Umaga and now Smith, all late developers but all combination rather than individual centres who honed the art of managing the midfield into a position of dominance in most cases. Its that aspect of Smiths wider scope of the position that is superior to BODs, and one that provides more consistency.

If you had one shred of evidence to back up that claim we might take you seriously,however you are just stating an opinion as fact.We've seen far more of BoD throughout his career and the idea that he isn't a team player is frankly stupid.This is a gut who started out as a young tyro scoring tries from everywhere,then injuries took the edge off his pace and he adapted to become the best defensive centre in the game,then he became known as an extra flanker because of his work at the breakdown and finally late in his career he has discovered that he has a talent for scoring important tries from close forward drives.

If he was individualistic as you think he wouldn't have adapted his game so much and so often to fit what his teammates and body were capable of.It's this ability to reinvent himself that for me makes him stand above all the others,Umaga and any of the others you care to mention only came good when at their physical peak but once the body started to go they were lost and unable to figure out a new way of playing.It'll be interesting to see if that happens Smith too.For me the NZ player that BoD has most in common with is McCaw,both of them have adapted their games over the years to suit the laws,the refs,their teams and their bodies,selfless team men to the core.

Good point...why leave it at just Smith...lets go for the bigger fish...you make me laugh.

My understanding is inside centre and looking for a replacement for Nonu. Conrad Smith is being rested this autumn in the hope that this prolongs his career until 2015. Having SBW in the squad gives us versatility if required but I'd be very surprised if Tew was looking to replace Smith with SBW as question marks lie already over Nonu and no obvious replacement for him stands out. Saili is the front runner but it's true that the same applies to 13. Ben Smith is likely to take that position this autumn and some alternatives need to be found.

flyhalffactory wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:If Conrad Smith had been playing for the Lions no way would he have been dropped for JD2 or missed all those vital tackles in game 2.

Game 2 of the Lions tour
Wednesday 5 June: Lions 69-17 Western Force - Paterson Stadium, Perth.

Try scorers: O'Driscoll (2), Sexton, Croft, Heaslip, Vunipola, Bowe, Farrell and Parling.

BOD wasn't dropped for anyone as a result of that performance.

Wow. That's some serious denial.

TEST 2, obviously. Do try and engage brain before commenting. Jesus, if I'm not sharp you must be the rubber weight.

Taylorman wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Taylorman wrote:There go the over protectors again...club and country blah blah...It is BODs individuality as a player that akes him a great player. Why? because hes had to take on other sides due to not having centre or whole team combinations capable of getting the points on the board. BODS best moments versus us is when he took the stuff you all Im going for it and did it all himself. That is what I mean by team versus individual.

NZ centres traditionally do take years to mature because the skill of managing the midfield space as a whole rather than as an individual takes experience. Experience in going up all the different types of midfields across the planet and working out the best way to combat each utilising the strengths of those very good players around them, a luxury BOD unfortunately did not have.

Joe Stanley, Bunce, Umaga and now Smith, all late developers but all combination rather than individual centres who honed the art of managing the midfield into a position of dominance in most cases. Its that aspect of Smiths wider scope of the position that is superior to BODs, and one that provides more consistency.

If you had one shred of evidence to back up that claim we might take you seriously,however you are just stating an opinion as fact.We've seen far more of BoD throughout his career and the idea that he isn't a team player is frankly stupid.This is a gut who started out as a young tyro scoring tries from everywhere,then injuries took the edge off his pace and he adapted to become the best defensive centre in the game,then he became known as an extra flanker because of his work at the breakdown and finally late in his career he has discovered that he has a talent for scoring important tries from close forward drives.

If he was individualistic as you think he wouldn't have adapted his game so much and so often to fit what his teammates and body were capable of.It's this ability to reinvent himself that for me makes him stand above all the others,Umaga and any of the others you care to mention only came good when at their physical peak but once the body started to go they were lost and unable to figure out a new way of playing.It'll be interesting to see if that happens Smith too.For me the NZ player that BoD has most in common with is McCaw,both of them have adapted their games over the years to suit the laws,the refs,their teams and their bodies,selfless team men to the core.

Good point...why leave it at just Smith...lets go for the bigger fish...you make me laugh.

Just returning the favour.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:If Conrad Smith had been playing for the Lions no way would he have been dropped for JD2 or missed all those vital tackles in game 2.

Game 2 of the Lions tour
Wednesday 5 June: Lions 69-17 Western Force - Paterson Stadium, Perth.

Try scorers: O'Driscoll (2), Sexton, Croft, Heaslip, Vunipola, Bowe, Farrell and Parling.

BOD wasn't dropped for anyone as a result of that performance.

Wow. That's some serious denial.

TEST 2, obviously. Do try and engage brain before commenting. Jesus, if I'm not sharp you must be the rubber weight.

Massive difference between game 2 and test 2 , even if you cloud the issue by CAPITALS!.

Precision and facts are the key, especially if one is on the forum for a specific agenda. If you are knocking the forum door and running away make sure you don't get caught in the act.

Taylorman wrote:yes fa the irony is that BOD has been more successful as an individual than as a team man. Smith is more of a team man than bod has ever been. His dropping from he Lions was not because he couldnt do his own job, but because he couldnt gel as a centre combination. The ultomate irony being he got dropped BECAUSE he wasnt a team man and IN SPITE of his individual talent and skills as a player. That can be argued till the cows come home but that is the way it went. Anyone with their eyes wide open could see that.

   

Taylorman, that has to be one of the most ridiculous comments I have read on here. Honestly, describing BOD as not being a team man? D'Arcy and BOD not gelling as a centre combination? Have you actually watched Ireland play over the past 10 years or what?

Your obsessive bitterness towards BOD has totally clouded your judgement, and you really are embarrassing yourself.

O'driscoll by a distance for me, the best centre I've had the pleasure of watching.

Taylorman wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I think the best people to ask the question regarding who is better, would be those who are impartial to both BOD and Conrad. Irish fans are obviously going to select BOD, but to be honest he is well known as a great rugby player by all non-bitter/sane fans. Unfortunately a few on here are now obsessively bitter towards him, and would never applaud his talents. Wouldn't you agree, Taylorman?

Also it would be a much better discussion without GloriousEmpire jumping in on every opportunity he gets to try and criticise BOD. Seriously, grow up mate. You are incredibly boring, have you nothing else to do but antagonise people?

my comments have never intentionally been aimed at BOD himself, more a seemingly never ending list of obsessessive and over protective fans who seem to believe he deserves preferential treatment and respect. The attacks on gatland, JD and so on at the expense of enjoying a LIons win. This one is comparing him to Smith when as far we're concerned BOD has played 13 tests against us and never contributed to a winning one. How is one possibly supposed to then agree that he is a better player let alone as good as. Ive seen BOD play enough, and Ive seen Smith play, and Ive simply seen far better and more consistent performances from Smith, regardless of who he plays for. I think he controls the midfield space better than anyone, he makes better use of the players around him than BOD does and has better instinct for the position, and, as I mentioned earlier, has been instrumental in masterminding and winning the midfield battles against just about every side hes played against.

BOD fans can disagree, and thats fine.

So you have decided to take it upon yourself to fight fire with fire, and jump in on every single comment made about BOD? How heroic. The social media trolls from Ireland seem to have moved on now anyway, why can't you? Not every irish fan has been "attacking" Gatland or JD or anyone. Most, if not all, disagreed with the decision however. Which is perfectly fine. Just as it is fine if you believe Conrad Smith is a better player than BOD. Though you and GE have both went much further than that, as you have clearly admitted with your little vendetta to combat the "obsessive and over-protective fans".

I really would love to see how the NZ fans would react to such criticism of their star players. I'm sure they wouldn't come across as "over-protective" at all. BTW you look awfully high up on that horse there..

flyhalffactory wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:If Conrad Smith had been playing for the Lions no way would he have been dropped for JD2 or missed all those vital tackles in game 2.

Game 2 of the Lions tour
Wednesday 5 June: Lions 69-17 Western Force - Paterson Stadium, Perth.

Try scorers: O'Driscoll (2), Sexton, Croft, Heaslip, Vunipola, Bowe, Farrell and Parling.

BOD wasn't dropped for anyone as a result of that performance.

Wow. That's some serious denial.

TEST 2, obviously. Do try and engage brain before commenting. Jesus, if I'm not sharp you must be the rubber weight.

Massive difference between game 2 and test 2 , even if you cloud the issue by CAPITALS!.

Precision and facts are the key, especially if one is on the forum for a specific agenda. If you are knocking the forum door and running away make sure you don't get caught in the act.

If the best defense of BoDs appalling test form you have is pretending not to know which matches I'm talking about then things are fairly dire for him.

Bod was humiliatingly bad in the second test and dropping him was inevitable. I think I posted on it about 30 minutes into the match.

Frankly my high school 2nd 15's centre would've looked good against that force outfit.

It shows how low his form has sunk that you are actually trying to claim that looking competent against Australia's worst regional sides B team makes him a quality player...

GE why do you insist on making a fool of yourself with really supid comments? You are clearly well spoken and articulate but so much of what you post is really easily proven to be complete garbage. Why do you do it to yourself?

Ad Hominem.

Use facts not personal attacks.

I can't understand anyone who chooses, when discussing two great players, to champion their own by dismissing the other us utterly unworthy.

Everyone will have a visceral attachment to players who have thrilled them. Matt Le Tissier's autobiography is full of fan and fellow player tributes to a man they believe was unbelievably special. My heart will always choose Dean Richards at his peak even though my head tells me there were players with a better claim to greatness at the same time he played.

If you make a case for Smith over BOD because of some strange distaste at the loyalty he has inspired, the belief that BOD is no team player, or the odd standard that great players only play for all-conquering teams, then it calls into question whether you really understand the nature of our sport.

Conrad Smith is a great player. So is Brian O'Driscoll. That was the starting point. You don't have to go down on either to state your preference.

GloriousEmpire wrote:Ad Hominem.

Use facts not personal attacks.

Ok heres a fact. If you insist on making idiotic comments I reserve the right to point out the fact that you are behaving like a buffoon.

Nope. Still ad Hominem.

GE

You have a lot of time to contibute to this thread. How about returning to the thread you started on referees and explaining to us how the NZRU has actively promoted non-white referees, and identifying the beneficiaries of that programme?

You seem to have gone strangely quiet on that front, which is odd given how important you think the topic is.

GloriousEmpire wrote:Nope. Still ad Hominem.

Wrong, its both a fact and an insult. I've no problem pointing it out when someone is acting like a clown. I have already pointed out ad nausium holes in the majority of your poorly thought out argements but its pointless.

One thing I have learned through studying interview techniques and interrogation for work is that you cannot reason with a fanatic. If you are interested on the subject refer to Nathan J. Gordon and William L. Fleisher's book Effective Interviewing and Interrogation Techniques.

Basically I could point all the holes in all your arguements all day long and it wouldnt change your mind because you are debating with your heart not your head and we both know that so there is no point throwing any more facts at you so I'd rather just call you a buffoon.

Nope. Still as Hominem. You can't call someone names because they won't agree with you.

It just shows up as frustrated and lacking in any actual substance to your argument.

GloriousEmpire wrote:Nope. Still as Hominem. You can't call someone names because they won't agree with you.

It just shows up as frustrated and lacking in any actual substance to your argument.

I already confirmed that I was calling you names. I am agreeing with you yet that is my point you cannot debate with a fanatic because evidently even when you agree with them they disagree with you.

I havent made many arguements other than point out both have an impressive array of skills, instead I largely pointed out how factually incorrect a lot of what you say is. Much more fun. I can tell you got quite frustrated too because of the obvious cognative shock you displayed as the thread evolved evident by the bizzare America's Cup tangent/rant, the point of which I'm not sure even you understand.

Im not calling you names because I dont agree with you but because I have given you concrete evidence of how idiotic your posts are yet you continue to trundle along happy to make the same mistakes over and over again.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I think the best people to ask the question regarding who is better, would be those who are impartial to both BOD and Conrad. Irish fans are obviously going to select BOD, but to be honest he is well known as a great rugby player by all non-bitter/sane fans. Unfortunately a few on here are now obsessively bitter towards him, and would never applaud his talents. Wouldn't you agree, Taylorman?

Also it would be a much better discussion without GloriousEmpire jumping in on every opportunity he gets to try and criticise BOD. Seriously, grow up mate. You are incredibly boring, have you nothing else to do but antagonise people?

my comments have never intentionally been aimed at BOD himself, more a seemingly never ending list of obsessessive and over protective fans who seem to believe he deserves preferential treatment and respect. The attacks on gatland, JD and so on at the expense of enjoying a LIons win. This one is comparing him to Smith when as far we're concerned BOD has played 13 tests against us and never contributed to a winning one. How is one possibly supposed to then agree that he is a better player let alone as good as. Ive seen BOD play enough, and Ive seen Smith play, and Ive simply seen far better and more consistent performances from Smith, regardless of who he plays for. I think he controls the midfield space better than anyone, he makes better use of the players around him than BOD does and has better instinct for the position, and, as I mentioned earlier, has been instrumental in masterminding and winning the midfield battles against just about every side hes played against.

BOD fans can disagree, and thats fine.

So you have decided to take it upon yourself to fight fire with fire, and jump in on every single comment made about BOD? How heroic. The social media trolls from Ireland seem to have moved on now anyway, why can't you? Not every irish fan has been "attacking" Gatland or JD or anyone. Most, if not all, disagreed with the decision however.  Which is perfectly fine.  Just as it is fine if you believe Conrad Smith is a better player than BOD.  Though you and GE have both went much further than that, as you have clearly admitted with your little vendetta to combat the "obsessive and over-protective fans".

I really would love to see how the NZ fans would react to such criticism of their star players.  I'm sure they wouldn't come across as "over-protective" at all.  BTW you look awfully high up on that horse there..

No vendetta rory...just dont rate the guy as highly as some do. Hasnt ever made me worry about any of our sides meeting him and how he goes against others is immaterial to me. Hes one of the better centres in world rugby, no more, no less. I cant help it if you and others dont understand my interpretation of the position in terms of individuality vs teamwork but I suppose if you havnt had the experience of regularly putting out dominant midfield combinations then thats understandable. Sure explains the number of losses though.

My point was merely this. BODs success largely comes from his individual skills as a centre, largely because he doesnt have either the team or midfield combinations around him to dominate the midfield. Smiths success largely come from his abilities to work with a bunch of equally talented players to control the midfield in an overall sense both defensively and on attack.

That to me makes him more of a asset to our team than a centre who is primarily gifted as an individual.

So for me the two cant be compared and it is partially the team environment they find themselves in that largely determines the type of centre a side needs. No one fault, just the way it is.

I cant help it if others completely fail to understand that concept rory.

Conrad will be looked back on as one of the best centres of his era.
O'Driscoll will be looked back on as one the greatest centres of any era.

Taylorman wrote:
No vendetta rory...just dont rate the guy as highly as some do. Hasnt ever made me worry about any of our sides meeting him and how he goes against others is immaterial to me. Hes one of the better centres in world rugby, no more, no less. I cant help it if you and others dont understand my interpretation of the position in terms of individuality vs teamwork but I suppose if you havnt had the experience of regularly putting out dominant midfield combinations then thats understandable. Sure explains the number of losses though.

My point was merely this. BODs success largely comes from his individual skills as a centre, largely because he doesnt have either the team or midfield combinations around him to dominate the midfield. Smiths success largely come from his abilities to work with a bunch of equally talented players to control the midfield in an overall sense both defensively and on attack.

That to me makes him more of a asset to our team than a centre who is primarily gifted as an individual.

So for me the two cant be compared and it is partially the team environment they find themselves in that largely determines the type of centre a side needs. No one fault, just the way it is.

I cant help it if others completely fail to understand that concept rory.

What a load of waffle,you make these statements but they are just hot air with no basis in reality.The fact that BoD "doesnt have either the team or midfield combinations around him to dominate the midfield" cannot be used as an argument that he is an inferior player.That has nothing to do with his talents and he has been a successful part of several different centre combinations.

You may believe that Smith has been part of dominant midfield combinations purely because of how good he is but anyone who understands rugby realises that it's incumbent on a strong pack and halfbacks to get the centres into the position to be dominant.The reason Smith has been more successful is because the players around him give him more opportunities to do so.You seem to have a fundemantal misunderstanding of how team sports work.

You have nothing to back up your argument with other than you're from NZ so obviously know more about centre play than anyone else on here.  

Feckless Rogue wrote:Conrad will be looked back on as one of the best centres of his era.
O'Driscoll will be looked back on as one the greatest centres of any era.

...By the clinically delusional.

Point if logic. Since we all agree that smith is superior now (as is JD2), surely then BoD can't be one of the best if THIS era. Which then precludes the greater point about "any" era.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

Feckless Rogue wrote:Conrad will be looked back on as one of the best centres of his era.
O'Driscoll will be looked back on as one the greatest centres of any era.

...By the clinically delusional.

Point if logic. Since we all agree that smith is superior now (as is JD2), surely then BoD can't be one of the best if THIS era. Which then precludes the greater point about "any" era.

Is that a joke or are you really that stupid?  

You know I think I have just cottoned in to the thread of disagreement.

It's the definition of greatness, I believe.

If the question is who made a greater contribution to their team, then unquestionably BoD. He has a longer career, was a regular captain and frankly surrounded by mediocrity he lifted Ireland to some level if credibility and will be desperately, sorely missed.

Conrad smith is clearly the superior player, but in a nation where the best player in the world holds almost every position from 1-15 then Conrad smith incrementally does not add so much by comparison. And take him away and wait two minutes and along will come a Richard Kahui or a Rene Ranger or a Francis Saili or an SBW to take over the worlds greatest mantle.

yet your arguments are somehow all based on fact? why is that? With Smith the amount of analysis that goes on here about winning combinations and why they are successful is plentiful. If you cant understand the difference between the skills of the two players then I cant help you. When we win or lose a match we break it down to the nth degree and from an AB point of view it becomes an obsession if we lose- why. Because we shouldnt. Understanding why we lose makes us stronger next time.

I'd suggest Irish fans don't have that level of analysis so the concept is probably foreign to you. Youre more likely to adopt a 'win some lose some', 'better luck next time' resignation because deep down you know you just dont have the firepower.

Well we do, rightly or wrongly, so we never settle for that kind of talk. your mere waving my argument off as waffle suggests you dont have the depth of appreciation of the concept to which Im referring.

Cant help you there...

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:

Feckless Rogue wrote:Conrad will be looked back on as one of the best centres of his era.
O'Driscoll will be looked back on as one the greatest centres of any era.

...By the clinically delusional.

Point if logic. Since we all agree that smith is superior now (as is JD2), surely then BoD can't be one of the best if THIS era. Which then precludes the greater point about "any" era.

Is that a joke or are you really that stupid?  

Again Ad Hominem. You can't dispute a point of logic by merely disagreeing with it, you must provide reasoning. And preferably without the personal attacks.

You said BOD was a legend of the game GE.

Why if BOD isn't a better centre now does that affect he's been around and better than any other centre for the last decade or so?

Taylorman wrote:yet your arguments are somehow all based on fact? why is that? With Smith the amount of analysis that goes on here about winning combinations and why they are successful is plentiful. If you cant understand the difference between the skills of the two players then I cant help you. When we win or lose a match we break it down to the nth degree and from an AB point of view it becomes an obsession if we lose- why. Because we shouldnt. Understanding why we lose makes us stronger next time.

I'd suggest Irish fans don't have that level of analysis so the concept is probably foreign to you. Youre more likely to adopt a 'win some lose some', 'better luck next time' resignation because deep down you know you just dont have the firepower.

Well we do, rightly or wrongly, so we never settle for that kind of talk. your mere waving my argument off as waffle suggests you dont have the depth of appreciation of the concept to which Im referring.

Cant help you there...

As well as being wrong in a number of things (especially the highlighted part, what on earth?) and having some rather strange logic (we understand perfectly, that doesn't change the fact it is incredibly flawed logic, no matter how much you try to weave it) do you not see how incredibly pompous and arrogant you are coming across in these posts?

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Taylorman wrote:
No vendetta rory...just dont rate the guy as highly as some do. Hasnt ever made me worry about any of our sides meeting him and how he goes against others is immaterial to me. Hes one of the better centres in world rugby, no more, no less. I cant help it if you and others dont understand my interpretation of the position in terms of individuality vs teamwork but I suppose if you havnt had the experience of regularly putting out dominant midfield combinations then thats understandable. Sure explains the number of losses though.

My point was merely this. BODs success largely comes from his individual skills as a centre, largely because he doesnt have either the team or midfield combinations around him to dominate the midfield. Smiths success largely come from his abilities to work with a bunch of equally talented players to control the midfield in an overall sense both defensively and on attack.

That to me makes him more of a asset to our team than a centre who is primarily gifted as an individual.

So for me the two cant be compared and it is partially the team environment they find themselves in that largely determines the type of centre a side needs. No one fault, just the way it is.

I cant help it if others completely fail to understand that concept rory.

What a load of waffle,you make these statements but they are just hot air with no basis in reality.The fact that BoD "doesnt have either the team or midfield combinations around him to dominate the midfield" cannot be used as an argument that he is an inferior player.That has nothing to do with his talents and he has been a successful part of several different centre combinations.

You may believe that Smith has been part of dominant midfield combinations purely because of how good he is but anyone who understands rugby realises that it's incumbent on a strong pack and halfbacks to get the centres into the position to be dominant.The reason Smith has been more successful is because the players around him give him more opportunities to do so.You seem to have a fundemantal misunderstanding of how team sports work.

You have nothing to back up your argument with other than you're from NZ so obviously know more about centre play than anyone else on here.  

There is a reason Ireland have a kiwi coach. And illustrated by your comments...perfectly.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:

Feckless Rogue wrote:Conrad will be looked back on as one of the best centres of his era.
O'Driscoll will be looked back on as one the greatest centres of any era.

...By the clinically delusional.

Point if logic. Since we all agree that smith is superior now (as is JD2), surely then BoD can't be one of the best if THIS era. Which then precludes the greater point about "any" era.

Is that a joke or are you really that stupid?  

Again Ad Hominem. You can't dispute a point of logic by merely disagreeing with it, you must provide reasoning. And preferably without the personal attacks.

Read the posts by Guns for a brief explanation. Alright I'll ask again in a more polite manner this time. Was that a joke or are you seriously asking that question?

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

Taylorman wrote:yet your arguments are somehow all based on fact? why is that? With Smith the amount of analysis that goes on here about winning combinations and why they are successful is plentiful. If you cant understand the difference between the skills of the two players then I cant help you. When we win or lose a match we break it down to the nth degree and from an AB point of view it becomes an obsession if we lose- why. Because we shouldnt. Understanding why we lose makes us stronger next time.

I'd suggest Irish fans don't have that level of analysis so the concept is probably foreign to you. Youre more likely to adopt a 'win some lose some', 'better luck next time' resignation because deep down you know you just dont have the firepower.

Well we do, rightly or wrongly, so we never settle for that kind of talk. your mere waving my argument off as waffle suggests you dont have the depth of appreciation of the concept to which Im referring.

Cant help you there...

As well as being wrong in a number of things (especially the highlighted part, what on earth?) and having some rather strange logic (we understand perfectly, that doesn't change the fact it is incredibly flawed logic, no matter how much you try to weave it) do you not see how incredibly pompous and arrogant you are coming across in these posts?

no. im merely stating my opionion. not getting personal. And am I being more arrogant than the multitudes who were still in denial over BODS dropping months after the fact, those who also...thought they were right- DESPITE the obvious evidence in front of them.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:If Conrad Smith had been playing for the Lions no way would he have been dropped for JD2 or missed all those vital tackles in game 2.

Game 2 of the Lions tour
Wednesday 5 June: Lions 69-17 Western Force - Paterson Stadium, Perth.

Try scorers: O'Driscoll (2), Sexton, Croft, Heaslip, Vunipola, Bowe, Farrell and Parling.

BOD wasn't dropped for anyone as a result of that performance.

Wow. That's some serious denial.

TEST 2, obviously. Do try and engage brain before commenting. Jesus, if I'm not sharp you must be the rubber weight.

Massive difference between game 2 and test 2 , even if you cloud the issue by CAPITALS!.

Precision and facts are the key, especially if one is on the forum for a specific agenda. If you are knocking the forum door and running away make sure you don't get caught in the act.

If the best defense of BoDs appalling test form you have is pretending not to know which matches I'm talking about then things are fairly dire for him.

Bod was humiliatingly bad in the second test and dropping him was inevitable. I think I posted on it about 30 minutes into the match.

Frankly my high school 2nd 15's centre would've looked good against that force outfit.

It shows how low his form has sunk that you are actually trying to claim that looking competent against Australia's worst regional sides B team makes him a quality player...

Firstly there is no correlation between the second game of the and me claiming him to be a quality player.... secondly and more illuminating is your ability to create a lie out of nothing, as I have never attempted to claim he looked competent in the second game. Not only are you consistently inaccurate, but you lie with unethical ease with the intent of winding up the forum site.

Its very amusing though....... it's like watching a bully in a schoolyard pushing a kid into another just to create a fight

Taylorman wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

Taylorman wrote:yet your arguments are somehow all based on fact? why is that? With Smith the amount of analysis that goes on here about winning combinations and why they are successful is plentiful. If you cant understand the difference between the skills of the two players then I cant help you. When we win or lose a match we break it down to the nth degree and from an AB point of view it becomes an obsession if we lose- why. Because we shouldnt. Understanding why we lose makes us stronger next time.

I'd suggest Irish fans don't have that level of analysis so the concept is probably foreign to you. Youre more likely to adopt a 'win some lose some', 'better luck next time' resignation because deep down you know you just dont have the firepower.

Well we do, rightly or wrongly, so we never settle for that kind of talk. your mere waving my argument off as waffle suggests you dont have the depth of appreciation of the concept to which Im referring.

Cant help you there...

As well as being wrong in a number of things (especially the highlighted part, what on earth?) and having some rather strange logic (we understand perfectly, that doesn't change the fact it is incredibly flawed logic, no matter how much you try to weave it) do you not see how incredibly pompous and arrogant you are coming across in these posts?

no. im merely stating my opionion. not getting personal. And am I being more arrogant than the multitudes who were still in denial over BODS dropping months after the fact, those who also...thought they were right- DESPITE the obvious evidence in front of them.

Answer me this rory- is the highlighted text in your opinion more correct, or not correct- honest opionion.

Again though you are bringing up something that has NOTHING to do with the original question, about BOD and Conrad. You continue to come back to the Lions incident, and the fans who let themselves down. You are beyond bitter about it and that is why your judgement of BOD is so clouded. This isn't simply about BOD as a player, and you aren't involved in this thread because of that. This is simply another chance for you to release whatever anger you have from the whole incident and the criticism that Gatland received.

Just because you're stating an opinion doesn't mean you aren't coming across as pompous and arrogant. It doesn't give you some special right to avoid criticism, as some seem to think it does. Surely you would understand that, as every opinion BOD has dared to utter since the Lions has been heavily scrutinised by the likes of yourself.