Re: Bateman interview : Mon Oct 30, 2017 11:56 am  

The_Enforcer wrote:

McGillveray always plays really well for England but looks just ok for Huddersfield when ive seen him

You possibly haven't been paying attention then. McGillvary always plays well against us. But the fact is he doesn't play for a particularly good team, so consequently his chances of catching the eye are limited.

But fair play to him, he has stuck with the Giants and if it is true that he is putting his own son's career ahead of his own then fair play to him on that too. I think he might live to regret that though. The chances of a youngster making it in football from City's system are remote whereas he would probably be a success in the NRL.

Re: Bateman interview : Mon Oct 30, 2017 1:39 pm  

Phuzzy wrote:

Is this a serious answer? So if YOU defined World class as only the best player who ever played the game then the rest of us would just have to accept it? You've put on a public forum your definition of world class as if it's some sort if definitive definition and your reply when it's challenged is 'I didn't ask you to agree'? Too right I didn't agree because it's total nonsense!
Answer me the question I posed: Were Brett Kenny and Wally Lewis both world class in your opinion and, if not, which one wasn't?

He's not wrong, people just throw the term 'World Class' around when what they mean is 'Very good player', it becomes meaningless. I'd say maybe the top 3 in the world in a position. Your definition is far too broad. Rhys Evans is competing at the highest level, world class he is not.

Re: Bateman interview : Mon Oct 30, 2017 7:38 pm  

Grimmy wrote:

Rhys Evans is competing at the highest level

Not any more he’s not!

Re: Bateman interview : Mon Oct 30, 2017 8:50 pm  

[quote="Phuzzy"]


Where did I say you have to accept anything I say? I didn't!!

I said it was my opinion and I didn't ask you to agree with it. Seems I'm wrong and only your opinion matters. With regards to it being a forum isn't the general idea that people with different opinions come together to discuss them?

To answer your question and humour you, Wally Lewis was picked at stand off in the 1982 Invincibles test sides and again in the 1986 sides. Brett Kenny was brilliant but if I had to pick a world 13 either of those years, I'd say Lewis edged it. Using my definition of world class (not expecting you to agree) I'd have probably picked Lewis.

Having considered the remarks on here, I'm willing to concede that more than one player (2/3 tops) can be considered world class in the same position.

Re: Bateman interview : Wed Nov 01, 2017 2:20 am  

Grimmy wrote:

He's not wrong, people just throw the term 'World Class' around when what they mean is 'Very good player', it becomes meaningless. I'd say maybe the top 3 in the world in a position. Your definition is far too broad. Rhys Evans is competing at the highest level, world class he is not.

I agree that maybe 2 or 3 in any position is pretty much a fair representation of what could be deemed world class, although even this isn't set in stone. I've known times when there's been more than that in any given position but as an approximate 'rule of thumb' I think it works ok.

You misunderstood what I meant by operating at the highest level if you think I would include Rhys Evans in that! He's never even operated at the highest Superleague level never mind above that! The highest level (as intended in my post) is the best of the international or SOO. Nothing else comes close to that description.

Re: Bateman interview : Wed Nov 01, 2017 2:29 am  

[quote="Bigredwarrior"]
Well for the record I thought we were discussing it and, given that you pretty much agree with me now, then I think it fair to say my opinion was valid in this instance, wouldn't you?

As for the rest of your post, I agree with most of that. I would have Lewis shading Kenny too. However I think we can agree that they were both undeniably world class which was the only point I was trying to make; that using only the 'best' 13 wasn't a workable way of deciding.

Anyway, we obviously agree now and there was no offence intended by my remarks. I hope none was taken.

Re: Bateman interview : Wed Nov 01, 2017 7:58 am  

[quote="Phuzzy"]

Give over, no offence taken at all. It's a discussion board and I'm always happy to discuss rugby league with anybody!!

Re: Bateman interview : Thu Nov 02, 2017 1:15 pm  

back on topic if I may (???!!!) but if the likes of Bateman and Gells are rumoured to be off then I have to once again push on with the my belief we need to be signing up someone like Ben Currie.

BC could fit in at centre, SR or Loose - coincidentally the preferred positions of the (potentially) departing players. when he came on for lockers in the ENG v AUS game on Saturday I just sat there thinking, wowsers... what if...

i'd be gutted if we lost Bateman to be honest, plus surely if we lost Gells we have one recognised Centre in the whole first team squad?!

Re: Bateman interview : Thu Nov 02, 2017 1:24 pm  

Parramatta so i've heard

Re: Bateman interview : Thu Nov 02, 2017 1:31 pm  

WiganBurt wrote:

back on topic if I may (???!!!) but if the likes of Bateman and Gells are rumoured to be off then I have to once again push on with the my belief we need to be signing up someone like Ben Currie.

BC could fit in at centre, SR or Loose - coincidentally the preferred positions of the (potentially) departing players. when he came on for lockers in the ENG v AUS game on Saturday I just sat there thinking, wowsers... what if...

i'd be gutted if we lost Bateman to be honest, plus surely if we lost Gells we have one recognised Centre in the whole first team squad?!

Forsyth would mean 2. But whether he is first choice standard is another thing.