Buck Shelford v Zinzan Brooke

Whenever you see Greatest Teams etc, one spot always stands out....NO.8 and usually its between the above two.

So come on which do you choose and why? Zinzan for his alround skills...or Buck for his sheer ferocious physicality.

On a side note...Is Parise on these guys level as an 8?

It is indeed a tough call between Buck and Zinzan. Their contrasting styles would tend to point towards a horses for courses selection, and may depend on who you selected at 6 and 7 in your team.

I genuinely cannot answer the question as to who was best, but what I would say is that if I was picking one of them to play for my life, then I would propbably plump for Shelford, who was tough as teak and would never ever give in.

And in answer to the Parisse question, it would be interesting to see him in an All Black or Springbok side to answer the question of whether he just shines in a poor Italy team or not. However we can only judge on the evidence before us, and on that I would say that he is a modern day great, but not quite at the same level as the two All Blacks here.

Whats the similarity between 50 cents (as in money not the 'artist') and Zinzan ? They're both worth half a BUCK

Both great players to be honest, but I'd just give it to Buck on the strength of the 'Battle of Nantes' -

"Playing only his second Test for the All Blacks against a physically intimidating French side, Shelford found himself at the bottom of a rather aggressive ruck on 20 minutes.
An errant Les Bleus stud found its way to his groin, where it somehow managed to tear his scrotum, leaving one testicle hanging out.

This alone would leave most men screaming in agony and heading for the nearest hospital. But not Shelford.
He calmly instructed the physio to stitch him up.
The French public were gobsmacked as an over-eager pitchside cameraman filmed the stomach-turning surgery, and even more so when Shelford returned to the field and carried on playing. "

I don't think too many would dispute that Shelford was one of the hardest barstewards to ever take the rugby field, and that he was a great player of his time.

However, I think the modern rule interpretations would make Zinzan a better fit in the current game - faster, more skilful and a more rounded player - in fact really the prototype for Parisse and Harry Ordinary.

Zinny was IMO the most skilful forward the game has ever seen. But he is a great because he did the hard yards first. Will never forget the 30 yard bullet he fired to Cullen from just outside his 22 in a Bledisloe game. Was amazing and you knew Cullen would score the second he caught it.

Has anyone got a story that trumps the one about Buck? As that'd probably be the thing that puts him at the top of the tree in hardness stakes.

Is it fact or fiction that he also played the same game with a broken arm ?

Colin Meads did, dunno about Buck.

Don't think so Falcon.

Think he ended up concussed in the same game though.

Read some bloke played with a broken neck for rest of the game, not too sure if that's hard or just fool hardy

Buck Shelford is one of my all time favourite players.................but if i was coach/selector, Zinnie would get the nod every time in the modern game. Buck's physicality (that made him so special) wouldnt be tolerated by today's referees.

PenfroPete wrote:Whats the similarity between 50 cents (as in money not the 'artist') and Zinzan ? They're both worth half a BUCK

Both great players to be honest, but I'd just give it to Buck on the strength of the 'Battle of Nantes' -

"Playing only his second Test for the All Blacks against a physically intimidating French side, Shelford found himself at the bottom of a rather aggressive ruck on 20 minutes.
An errant Les Bleus stud found its way to his groin, where it somehow managed to tear his scrotum, leaving one testicle hanging out.

This alone would leave most men screaming in agony and heading for the nearest hospital. But not Shelford.
He calmly instructed the physio to stitch him up.
The French public were gobsmacked as an over-eager pitchside cameraman filmed the stomach-turning surgery, and even more so when Shelford returned to the field and carried on playing. "

I was just a little sick in my mouth.

What a crazy hard bastad

Zinzan was brilliant - remember his 50 yard drop goal against England in 95? He said the rest of the team expected it but they were all surprised he didn't do it with his left foot! Don't think there are many modern day forwards capable of that!

Buck was a tough nut though. Couldn't we have them both in the team?!

Ah maybe im getting confused with Mr Meads...

Wasnt it the football goalkeeper Bert Trautman who played for man city with a broken neck...

zinny sat in the wings behind buck and michael jones for quite some time. he was so competitive in everything he did and blossomed hugely late. everything was a competition to zinny. He never gave anything away. Even getting on and off the team bus was a competition to zinny. so fircely, annoyingly at times, competetive.
I wonder why hes not putting back into the game.
Id love to see a coaching effort out of those 80's ABs. At least Kirwans doing his bit.
Wonder if he'll ever get the AB job.
I'd back him.

Maybe you answered the question there Taylorman. He could be so competitive that he couldn't handle being so close to the ABs without being in the team.

You are right that a wealth of knowledge is in that group of players. Some have but not enough. Always thought Kirk was underused.

Zinny had the ego (in a good way),the skills etc
Buck was the warrior (the most succesful AB captain)the leader of men into battle.........

Zinny couldnt cut Bucks lunch.....

It would have to be Zinzan in the skill and tactical dept, and Buck in the Warrior with guts leading his team , but both were truly great players, who would be a credit to any team ! But i feel that Zinzan was the more rounded player, so for me it would have to be him!