Wayne Smith surely has few peers as a rugby thinker in NZ. He’s one of those people who’s managed to stay respected for a huge period of time for both his skills and his integrity. Would be great to hear more from him. As an aside, really not a JK fan - apart from the trendy garb I think he brings nothing at all, and the more I listen to him the more I understand why the Blues were a disaster under him. When he provides “analysis” I honestly wonder sometimes if I watched a different game.
Dylan, be interested to get your musings on David White’s reign in due course. I have nothing to go on except a view from the outside where on the one hand he was there for a period of unprecedented success but on the other I really don’t know what he contributed to that, and when the gloss started to fade I don’t feel I saw any real leadership from him. He comes across as austere and unimaginative, but I’m not sure if that’s fair.
I appreciate the considered views you bring to rugby's ongoing discussion. It is why I look forward enthusiastically to your weekly discourse. But please, pretty please, desist from using that Australian commentators frequent abuse of the most basic rules of rugby. I refer to their constant reference to a penalty as a stiff-arm. To infringe is either a penalty or a free kick. Football has its usage off patt. Why rugby, when broadcast from Australia can't follow suit, only Buddha knows. Stiff arm, short arm should not be part of good rugby commentary, outside of Australia.
The second issue I have with your good take on Wayne Smith, is to lump him into the same intellectual rugby barrel of the otherwise likeable John Kirwin. Their respective contributions to what is wrong/good about modern rugby are poles apart. One understands rugby like few others. The other warrants his permanent place alongside such noted bore-fests as Jeff and Mils. Thank you.
A few quick thoughts:
Wayne Smith surely has few peers as a rugby thinker in NZ. He’s one of those people who’s managed to stay respected for a huge period of time for both his skills and his integrity. Would be great to hear more from him. As an aside, really not a JK fan - apart from the trendy garb I think he brings nothing at all, and the more I listen to him the more I understand why the Blues were a disaster under him. When he provides “analysis” I honestly wonder sometimes if I watched a different game.
Dylan, be interested to get your musings on David White’s reign in due course. I have nothing to go on except a view from the outside where on the one hand he was there for a period of unprecedented success but on the other I really don’t know what he contributed to that, and when the gloss started to fade I don’t feel I saw any real leadership from him. He comes across as austere and unimaginative, but I’m not sure if that’s fair.
Anyone else think the Warriors got the rub of the green last night? Coincidence? Long may it last I say
Dear Dylan,
I appreciate the considered views you bring to rugby's ongoing discussion. It is why I look forward enthusiastically to your weekly discourse. But please, pretty please, desist from using that Australian commentators frequent abuse of the most basic rules of rugby. I refer to their constant reference to a penalty as a stiff-arm. To infringe is either a penalty or a free kick. Football has its usage off patt. Why rugby, when broadcast from Australia can't follow suit, only Buddha knows. Stiff arm, short arm should not be part of good rugby commentary, outside of Australia.
The second issue I have with your good take on Wayne Smith, is to lump him into the same intellectual rugby barrel of the otherwise likeable John Kirwin. Their respective contributions to what is wrong/good about modern rugby are poles apart. One understands rugby like few others. The other warrants his permanent place alongside such noted bore-fests as Jeff and Mils. Thank you.