Quote SmokeyTA="SmokeyTA"Brough never got a shot at a big club for a reason, and it wasnt his attitude. Long, Pryce, Briers, all terrible attitudes, all got a go at the big time because their skill demanded it.
Brough is no different to Chase. A player who looks good in a poor side, but struggles in the big time. You forgive him his mistakes and blame others for not giving him the platform, and wax lyrical when he looks good regardless of the efforts of others. If Brough had more skill in his big toe than Sinfield in his whole body, you would think Brough would, by the age 28, at some time showed it.
Ill readily accept Sinfield isnt as good as his counterparts for Aus and NZ, he is however the best we have. Brough isnt close,'"
I don't always agree with you Smokes, but I do here.
For all the talk, the Brough everyone rates as england's best never seems to turn up when I see the Giants, or indeed his other teams. I'm not saying it never happens, but...
If we'd have dominated up front and failed to capitalise, then I can see why you'd slag off the stand off, but that's not what happened.
Some one once said that if you do 90% of things 5% better than the oppostion, you'll have a lot more success than a team than can do 10% things 50% better.
That's why Australia beat us, becuase they were a little bit better at everything. A little bit stronger, a little bit faster, a little bit smarter and a little bit cooler under pressure. Had we had a few of the injured guys, we may have been able to muscle up more, but on the whole they're a better all round rugby nation than us.
Dropping a country's best players and replacing them with the 2nd best isn't the way to solve it, raising the bar of our alround rugby is. It's not a quick fix.