George tells it like it is. What a guy.

 

40 Caps by 22 years old, wouldn't discount him breaking the record one day.

If he keeps scoring and creating tries I wouldnt mind him breaking the record

madmaccas wrote:40 Caps by 22 years old, wouldn't discount him breaking the record one day.

He'd have to be close if he's still playing international rugby at 30.

IronMike wrote:If he keeps scoring and creating tries I wouldnt mind him breaking the record

If he keeps going at the rate he is, he could get there. It'll be interesting to see if someone like Savea lifts the bar before then.

blackcanelion wrote:

IronMike wrote:If he keeps scoring and creating tries I wouldnt mind him breaking the record

If he keeps going at the rate he is, he could get there. It'll be interesting to see if someone like Savea lifts the bar before then.

Depends on who plays the lower tier teams the most really.

Is the Super League the 'bar' at the moment though ? Seems more of a mess than the Rabbo

http://www.wru.co.uk/eng/wales/stats/player/wales_all_time_try_scorers.php

Will need to beat Shane's 60 tries (included two Lions tries). Not easy that.


http://www.wru.co.uk/eng/wales/stats/records/wales_centurions.php

Gethin Jenkins holds the cap record for Wales at the moment with 105.

In regards to Savea vs North, Savea has the much higher strike rate and has an easier pool in the up and coming RWC to add to that haul. In terms of longevity, North should be around longer simply because NZ is a harder team to get into than Wales. Plus North has been around for a long time already.

The strike rate of a winger tends to fall after an early prolifery. This is exactly what made Shane such a phenomenon is that his strike rate probably improved if anything.

Savea will be "worked out" I have no doubt and his strike rate will decrease. He also plays in a better team and has more opportunity to score tries in easy games for New Zealand whereas George North often scores game changing tries against more challenging opposition for Wales.

George North will inevitably become a legend of the game in Wales and on the international stage whereas I don't think Savea will stand out amongst some of the other wings produced in New Zealand that's why he is so special.

Have to disagree with that. Savea is no longer a new kid on the block. He's becoming a stalwart of the backline: he's our only genuine 11. He's actually grown his game. Coming in off the wing, turning the ball on the inside like the last try against SA, devastating finish like the last try against England and in tune with other players like the first try against Ireland or England. How is he getting worked out? He's getting better!

And who are these weak games you speak of? The RWC pool is not up to the level of difficulty of Wales' but every year NZ plays SA twice, Oz 3 times, and at least one or two NH heavyweights. Stacked up against Wales' competition that does not make for less challenging teams by any stretch of the imagination.

That said, I greatly admire North as a player and would hope Gatland employs a more attacking mindset to get the best out of him.

I want him in the centre with JD2 or Corey Allen. Jordan Williams and Cuthbert on the wings, lets play some sexay rugby again.

But hes not a better centre than the options we have and hes a better winger than Cuthbert and Williams

No not yet he isn't. Williams is a much better fullback than wing.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Have to disagree with that. Savea is no longer a new kid on the block. He's becoming a stalwart of the backline: he's our only genuine 11. He's actually grown his game. Coming in off the wing, turning the ball on the inside like the last try against SA, devastating finish like the last try against England and in tune with other players like the first try against Ireland or England. How is he getting worked out? He's getting better!

And who are these weak games you speak of? The RWC pool is not up to the level of difficulty of Wales' but every year NZ plays SA twice, Oz 3 times, and at least one or two NH heavyweights. Stacked up against Wales' competition that does not make for less challenging teams by any stretch of the imagination.

That said, I greatly admire North as a player and would hope Gatland employs a more attacking mindset to get the best out of him.

I mean the games are weak for New Zealand where by comparison Wales might struggle against teams who New Zealand might cut loose against giving more opportunities for Savea to score where if George North where to score for Wales it would be a more difficult task.

I think I am saying New Zealand naturally create more chances for a winger not to impune Savea's finishing or the fixture calendar

Scramble wrote:The strike rate of a winger tends to fall after an early prolifery. This is exactly what made Shane such a phenomenon is that his strike rate probably improved if anything.

Savea will be "worked out" I have no doubt and his strike rate will decrease. He also plays in a better team and has more opportunity to score tries in easy games for New Zealand whereas George North often scores game changing tries against more challenging opposition for Wales.

George North will inevitably become a legend of the game in Wales and on the international stage whereas I don't think Savea will stand out amongst some of the other wings produced in New Zealand that's why he is so special.

That seems a bit like a one eyed point of view to be honest. George North plays more games against higher ranked teams because Wales has an average ranking. Savea only plays against lower ranked teams because he is in the top ranked team.
On the other hand Wales plays regularly against lowly ranked teams like Scotland and Italy while Savea plays more often against highly ranked teams like Australia and South Africa.

According to wiki (a bit out of date it seems but still indicative)
North 58 club games for 15 tries
Savea 48 hurricanes games for 19 tries

Whether or not North and Savea become legends in their countries or internationally will have more to do with fan boys and media and less to do with their rugby prowess. We'll wait and see if either player is found out or not.

I don't buy into the thinking that a player's prowess should be lessened because he plays in a good team or that a player's prowess should be increased because he plays in a poor team. Talent is talent: it can't be invented from the players around you and you can't hide if you don't have it. NZ, for example, struggled for years at halfback. They didn't look better because Carter stood outside them.

l also disagree with your contention that Savea will be found out. I for one am expecting him to be a handful for England this June. When you have a guy that big, strong and fast in a team that can exploit space like you say, but who is also improving his all-round game, I don't expect that strike rate to dip.

Compare the two RWC pools

Wales have England,Australia,Fiji,Playoff winner - 6th,4th,3rd,11th and unknown.

NZ have Argentina,Tonga,Georgia and African team -1st, 9th, 12th, 16th and unknown.

Pool A is much stronger.

nganboy wrote:

Scramble wrote:The strike rate of a winger tends to fall after an early prolifery. This is exactly what made Shane such a phenomenon is that his strike rate probably improved if anything.

Savea will be "worked out" I have no doubt and his strike rate will decrease. He also plays in a better team and has more opportunity to score tries in easy games for New Zealand whereas George North often scores game changing tries against more challenging opposition for Wales.

George North will inevitably become a legend of the game in Wales and on the international stage whereas I don't think Savea will stand out amongst some of the other wings produced in New Zealand that's why he is so special.

That seems a bit like a one eyed point of view to be honest. George North plays more games against higher ranked teams because Wales has an average ranking. Savea only plays against lower ranked teams because he is in the top ranked team.
On the other hand Wales plays regularly against lowly ranked teams like Scotland and Italy while Savea plays more often against highly ranked teams like Australia and South Africa.

According to wiki (a bit out of date it seems but still indicative)
North 58 club games for 15 tries
Savea 48 hurricanes games for 19 tries

Whether or not North and Savea become legends in their countries or internationally will have more to do with fan boys and media and less to do with their rugby prowess.  We'll wait and see if either player is found out or not.

Super rugby promotes try scoring with bonus points so it's only to be expected that more tries will be scored by try scorers. If anything it seems to me that George north's club try scoring record is all the more impressive for being so close in a tournament which is naturally more of an arm wrestle with better defence?

Scramble wrote:

nganboy wrote:

Scramble wrote:The strike rate of a winger tends to fall after an early prolifery. This is exactly what made Shane such a phenomenon is that his strike rate probably improved if anything.

Savea will be "worked out" I have no doubt and his strike rate will decrease. He also plays in a better team and has more opportunity to score tries in easy games for New Zealand whereas George North often scores game changing tries against more challenging opposition for Wales.

George North will inevitably become a legend of the game in Wales and on the international stage whereas I don't think Savea will stand out amongst some of the other wings produced in New Zealand that's why he is so special.

That seems a bit like a one eyed point of view to be honest. George North plays more games against higher ranked teams because Wales has an average ranking. Savea only plays against lower ranked teams because he is in the top ranked team.
On the other hand Wales plays regularly against lowly ranked teams like Scotland and Italy while Savea plays more often against highly ranked teams like Australia and South Africa.

According to wiki (a bit out of date it seems but still indicative)
North 58 club games for 15 tries
Savea 48 hurricanes games for 19 tries

Whether or not North and Savea become legends in their countries or internationally will have more to do with fan boys and media and less to do with their rugby prowess.  We'll wait and see if either player is found out or not.

Super rugby promotes try scoring with bonus points so it's only to be expected that more tries will be scored by try scorers. If anything it seems to me that George north's club try scoring record is all the more impressive for being so close in a tournament which is naturally more of an arm wrestle with better defence?

Which league would that be? AP and Pro12 both have try scoring bonus points.

And incidently, looking at the tables so far (both leagues with one game to play) total points scored is 5145 in the AP vs 5096 for the Pro12 - in both cases an average of a little over 40 a game and sod all difference between the two.

beshocked wrote:Compare the two RWC pools

Wales have England,Australia,Fiji,Playoff winner - 6th,4th,3rd,11th and unknown.

NZ have Argentina,Tonga,Georgia and African team -1st, 9th, 12th, 16th and unknown.

Pool A is much stronger.

No one's denying that beshocked. We were speaking in general terms.

Tell that to the Crusaders Scramble who can't get a bonus point for love nor money.   

Also, there are Super teams who have very good defences and good attacks. It's a myth that Super defence is weak and the pace of NH rugby is slower. Much depends on the teams and the conditions.

Just a silly bit of analysis but I have just been looking at the average points scored per game in super rugby and top14 also.

Next to no difference between AP, Pro12 and top14 (points per game 40.83, 40.44, 40.66 respectively) Overall in super rugby the average points/game is 48.44

Highest scoring teams over all of these leagues?
top is the Hurricanes averaging 29.7 pts/game. Next are that useless bunch of mercenaries - Saracens with 28.67. Obviously they are getting something right.

Defense. Not surprisingly the top 3 teams in terms of conceding least points per game are in the Pro12 - Ulster, Glasgow Munster (in that order).

4th on the overall list is Saracens.

Well put it this way, how many tries would George North have scored if he played for New Zealand or South Africa and not Wales? More or fewer?

Nothing to do with his salary being probably double what those in SR can afford then???

Salary for top players in SR is $300-400,000 so it's about even to what he is on now (and I realise that not all of that money comes from the union).

The Saint wrote:Salary for top players in SR is $300-400,000 so it's about even to what he is on now (and I realise that not all of that money comes from the union).

He wouldn't get $300-400,000 in super rugby. That's not because he isn't worth it and it's not a comment on his relative ability. It's a reflection of how super rugby works. My reasoning being:
1. There are limited funds
2. Top dollar is usually reserved (probably exclusively reserved) for top local players that the union wants to keep in the country.
3. I think it's less than that in some countries. Say in NZ the maximum for next year is $185,000 for super 15 and $55,000 for the ITM cup. These are maximums. There is potential for earnings from endorsements.
4. There would have to be a compelling reason to bring him. There are only 10-20 wing positions in each nation. It sounds a lot, until you realise that this includes a need to supply the national side and develop players and the shortfall can usually be made up with local players who have chosen to play for the Islands.

If he wanted to come it have to be for the rugby not the cash.

I went to the same school as George North, (okay so I left before he started) and have been shopping in Kings Lynn twice, so we're virtually related and all he is stating is his ambition to gain 100 caps for Wales. The "what a guy" epithet is misplaced. George is a model professional.

Norfolklass wrote:I went to the same school as George North, (okay so I left before he started) and have been shopping in Kings Lynn twice, so we're virtually related and all he is stating is his ambition to gain 100 caps for Wales. The "what a guy" epithet is misplaced. George is a model professional.

So you went to school in Anglesey? or are you trying to be funny or using weak sarcasm? At least I know George and his family and yes he is "What a guy" no one has ever questioned his professionalism so get off the moral high ground and do one  

I don't understand how for some people it's hard to accept when the best player in the world in a position is welsh. If it's a New Zealander like carter, or Australian like Genia or Irishman like O'Driscoll or South African like victor Matfield or Englishman like wilkinson or Chris Ashton then everybody can accept it but when we have the best winger by some distance who has proven himself time as again and he is welsh everyone lines up to drag him down.

Scramble wrote:I don't understand how for some people it's hard to accept when the best player in the world in a position is welsh. If it's a New Zealander like carter, or Australian like Genia or Irishman like O'Driscoll or South African like victor Matfield or Englishman like wilkinson or Chris Ashton then everybody can accept it but when we have the best winger by some distance who has proven himself time as again and he is welsh everyone lines up to drag him down.

Fact is Wales have had many many individual players who have been the best in the world, Barry John, JPR, Edwards, Bennett, 1/2penny, North not many if any can beat them. In a nutshell, Kiwi's are a delusional bunch who have little else to cheer on and English.....well nuff said their English  

Let's not make this a parochial nationalistic thing. It's not about criticising others it is merely about claiming the right to be proud of outstanding Welshmen who have reached the top of the ladder.

Scramble wrote:Let's not make this a parochial nationalistic thing. It's not about criticising others it is merely about claiming the right to be proud of outstanding Welshmen who have reached the top of the ladder.

Ain't been here that long have you? .... or have you  

Its really hard to define who the best player in any position is though, especially one like winger - Ben Smith scored more tries than North last year, does that make him a better winger?

When Ben smith has won a lions series virtually single handed and made a World Cup semi final then he will be up for consideration.

 

New wum on the block then!

George who?

Ickle Shane would have run through his legs.

Or over him like he did Banahan   

Barney McGrew did it wrote:George who?

Ickle Shane would have run through his legs.

Shane has already joined the well endowed annals of welsh legends but to make my point even more apparent - despite his heroics as the worlds leading international try scorer amongst top nations - never received the plaudits he deserved.

No 7&1/2 wrote:New wum on the block then!

How is it Wumming to demand respect for welsh legends?

rainbow-warrior wrote:

Scramble wrote:I don't understand how for some people it's hard to accept when the best player in the world in a position is welsh. If it's a New Zealander like carter, or Australian like Genia or Irishman like O'Driscoll or South African like victor Matfield or Englishman like wilkinson or Chris Ashton then everybody can accept it but when we have the best winger by some distance who has proven himself time as again and he is welsh everyone lines up to drag him down.

Fact is Wales have had many many individual players who have been the best in the world, Barry John, JPR, Edwards, Bennett, 1/2penny, North not many if any can beat them.  In a nutshell, Kiwi's are a delusional bunch who have little else to cheer on and English.....well nuff said their English  

Rainbow, why do you have to do that, you start off with a perfectly normal and credible comment and then you simply have to get a dig into two nations.

Please desist with your tarring everyone with the same brush.

Scramble wrote:When Ben smith has won a lions series virtually single handed and made a World Cup semi final then he will be up for consideration.

Never have I heard before a statement arguing that a world cup semi-final as a career achievement!!!!! You're part of a team that was 4th best in the world ... woo hoo!!!!!

PS - Just for reference... that AUS team was the weakest lions facing team in professional history (as much as I am a big lions fan).

2013 AUS - SF in last RWC. 0 wins out of 4 vs. NZ & SA. Last of 3N teams in RC. Home record vs. Lions, SA & NZ. 1 win in 5 (20% record).
2009 SA - Reigning world champs. 5 wins out of 6 vs. NZ & AUS. Won 3N. Home record vs. Lions, NZ & AUS, once again 5 wins in 6 (87% record).
2005 NZ -  SF in last RWC. 3 wins in 4 vs. SA & AUS. Won 3N. Home record vs. Lions, AUS & SA. 5 wins in 5 (100% record).
2001 AUS - Reigning world champs. 2 wins in 4 vs. SA & NZ. Won 3N. Home record vs. Lions, SA & NZ, 3 wins in 5 (60% record).
1997 SA - Reigning world champs. 1 win in 4 vs. NZ & AUS. 2nd in 3N. Home record vs. Lions, AUS & NZ, 2 wins in 5 (40% record).

Series in AUS count... but only really as a footnote. The only series that truly matter are those in NZ and those in SA. Those are the acid test series, the ones that go down in history to whether a team was any good or not.

Sorry but thats absolute shoite, ask any real Lions fan or more importantly the players if the series 'counted'   

Are Australia's 2 Rwc victories a footnote too? Australia is not an easy place to tour with a 3 match series, regardless of how difficult SA and NZ are. Credit where credit is due. The Lions won and it was a comprehensive 3rd victory and a close fought series victory overall.

George North however did not do the damage in the 3rd test. That was Halfpenny. But far too much emphasis is given to individuals. It's a team game and the best teams count.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Are Australia's 2 Rwc victories a footnote too? Australia is not an easy place to tour with a 3 match series, regardless of how difficult SA and NZ are. Credit where credit is due. The Lions won and it was a comprehensive 3rd victory and a close fought series victory overall.

George North however did not do the damage in the 3rd test. That was Halfpenny. But far too much emphasis is given to individuals. It's a team game and the best teams count.

This.

Scramble wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:New wum on the block then!

How is it Wumming to demand respect for welsh legends?

I assumed you were based on the fact you don't rate South Africa and you think North won the Lions singlehandedly.

Ask a lions fan if the 3rd test in SA 09 wasn't a dead rubber and they will say it wasn't..... but the truth of the matter is.... it was. Can't base opinion on loyal fans only. Thats amateur night.

They faced the worst team in the 3N at the time... one that was smashed by their SH rivals in the same year losing EVERY match home and away. In 2013 they were a bad side.

In rugby.... 2 tours stick out. SA & NZ. They are stratospheres ahead of anywhere else... because their record at home is ridiculous.

The lions record vs. the 3N is thus

AUS - 7 series wins out of 8 (87%)
SA - 4 series wins out of 13 (31%) (2 wins in 18th century when sport had hardly been introduced... SA didn't even start touring until 1906).
NZ - 1 series wins out of 9 (11%).

Thats a huge gulf between SA & NZ and AUS. The first two the odds and history are stacked against the Lions, the latter, they're expected to win.

AUS were a great team in the 90s but they haven't been close to the summit since then. Its simply not the same as a series win in SA or NZ.

Unless BOD was picked, right ?   

fa0019 wrote:

They faced the worst team in the 3N at the time... one that was smashed by their SH rivals in the same year losing EVERY match home and away. In 2013 they were a bad side.

You could argue that was because NZ and SA were and still are, a lot better than everyone else in world rugby. If anything, it shows that the Lions team, at the tail-end of the tour, were on the same level as SA and NZ. Not surprising, as they had some handy players throughout the squad.

These terms insinuating rebuilding teams, dead rubber Lions tours, weakest Aus team in the world is getting really boring now.  

The Saint wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

They faced the worst team in the 3N at the time... one that was smashed by their SH rivals in the same year losing EVERY match home and away. In 2013 they were a bad side.

You could argue that was because NZ and SA were and still are, a lot better than everyone else in world rugby. If anything, it shows that the Lions team, at the tail-end of the tour, were on the same level as SA and NZ. Not surprising, as they had some handy players throughout the squad.

These terms insinuating rebuilding teams, dead rubber Lions tours, weakest Aus team in the world is getting really boring now.  

Let's be honest, if the UK united as a UK team rather than Wales, England & Scotland then they would be booting other nations off the park year in and year out. Thankfully there are better things to do like the 6 Nations, Euro Cup whatever the set up it takes.