Manu Vatuvei vs Johan Lomu

Lets say we could put them both through a rigorous test of defence/broken field running/standing start tryline sniffing/defusing kicks/option taking etc

Which do you think would come out on top? Would Lomu have had such an impact on League if he had tried? Or is it fair to say that the defences of 1990's rugby teams not a patch on todays NRL.

I think Manu may very well be the better player, especially if we get another 5 good years out of him. Lomu was brilliiant for a time and more explosive on attack than Manu, but Lomu was ultimately flawed and not really tested defensively or the the air like Manu has been

Manu 9.5/10
Lomu 9.3/10

neither. Taniela Tuiaki would come out top.

Pretty sure Manu could have gotten over the try line against the Boks at least once

Isn't Tuiaki a cripple now neil? :>

90's rugby defensive patterns are not the same as the defensive patterns Manu has to face on a week to week basis let alone on an International level.

The greatest rugby/league attacking weapon of ALL TIME was Christian Cullen circa 1996. EFT.
Second would be Rupeni Caucau circa 2002. But he's a long way back.

heh, actually agree about Cullen.

He was a fkn BEAST!

I KNEW you would babble on about Cullen

Not that I disagree though, personaly I think Lomu is/was horribly over rated. He cruises the world now a special guest to everyone and often referred to as the greatest rugby player of all time. Pretty wack for a guy whose real strength was just stomping allover people

lomu, best known for never crossing the line against the boks.

sivivatu at his best is pretty damned good...

ps who is JOHAN lomu? hah...lomu at his best was pretty damned amazing. to begin with it seemed barely anyone could tackle him, and that has nothing to do with 'defensive' patterns dalai discusses.

with that as your criteria, sivivatu at his best would prob come out tops out of anyone.

jonah was always more of a 'finisher'.

this thread is not about sivivatu, can you read?

i added him to the discussion, just as christian cullen and tuiaki were added.

If you think Sivivatu belongs here, you know shit

Sivi is horrible!!! He is like a headless chicken on the field.

except when planning the boks obviously

I'm gonna disagree with ya there buddy. Defensive patterns nullify the risk of letting your small players in one on one situations with beasts like Manu or Jonah.

In any case, it has been well documented the massive difference between the defensive abilities of rugby and league players in the 90's. So much so that modern rugby owes a tremendous amount to league in defense strategies, both individually and in team patterns.

I can't believe people are entertaining the thought of Vatuvei even being half as good as Jonah Lomu was.

What the hell...did you not see Warriors vs Eels 2007. One of the most embarassing individual Warriors performances of all time. Still often talked about.

Excellent points! :>

And the way he's come back from that has been admirable -- he's very, very solid in defence now

Let's all give him a pat on the back.

Lomu oozed class, was highly inventive and was definitely the smarter / more intelligent and more assured player of the two, Vatuvei is blatantly injury prone and partial to brain explosions and handling errors.

Physically - I'd bet that Lomu at his peak was stronger and faster (he used to run 100m in -11secs) and more skillful and varied on attack, eg. he could run over / side step / fend pretty much anyone in the game. He was also a great defender, known for perfect spot hits and throwing smaller European players around like rag-dolls - Youtube 'lomu tackles' and see what comes up.

Don't get me wrong I love Vatuvei but he's not even the best winger in the NRL let alone a comparison to Lomu...IMO.

Hassling Manu for one shocker? Someone is conveniently forgetting Lomus debut against France

GTFO with trying to bring in other players too, the whole point of the thread is obviously to compare beasts

(I mean vadz/codpeice)

You just can't compare Lomu running over puny British wingers to what Vatuvei has to deal with week in week out in the NRL.

Lomu was awesome -- he changed the game. But that's saying as much about 90s rugby union than anything else.

lomu could do big spot tackles, but would sometimes find himself out of position.

maestro re debut...do you know that lomu had actually been a number 8 pretty much right up until he played for the ABs?

Yes of course...but most of that rugby was schoolboy.....of course he wore numbr 8. But anyway...I really think one off games are largely irrelevant, I was just making a point

Oh and Manu pretty much IS the best wingr in the NRL, if he was Australian he would play SoO for sure. Plus he is now the warriors highest paid

Injury prone? Whatever happened to Lomus career again?

Also the only other competitor for best winger in the NRL is Aquila Uate and the only reason Uate got the Dally M Winger of the year award last year was because he played more games. Manu dominated him when the two went head to head.

He had a good run? Definitely 50+ All Blacks caps over the course of several years... was never injury prone, kidney disease doesn't count :p

Kidney disease definitely counts! It cut his career short but iirc he also had hamstring and knee issues. Correct me if I'm wrong.

WTF??? Inventive, classy and smart? He was a bulldozer who ran over people- not much thought or planning involved buddy

The problem with Vatuvei gtting injured all the time is that he has no 'give' which contributes to his succeptability to getting injured. Saturday night was the perfect example, guy smashes into him and he tenses his leg muscle to hold firm and bang, leg fucked. Roll with the punches bro, you're tough, but not invincible. Lomu wins.

First, lol @ comparing wingers from such different sports, from such different eras.

Union winger has a lot more room than a League winger (on average). So essentially Manu has a lot less to work with. But, Lomu had to deal with a lot more high ball than Manu will ever have to. Manu would get absolutely owned in a ruck situation. Again, it's just silly comparing two based on different sports.

In my opinion Manu can be such a good winger, if he used he's brain a little more. I've never seen him trying different running lines, he knows one way - straight. All good for a big fella like him, but if he changed the direction of running just a little bit, the defenders would not have a chance. At this stage he's too predictable. Still scores from 10 out, but if defenders basically have started throwing themselves into his legs and as weekend game shows, he is getting fucked up.

Lomu was never a skill expert. But he had pace, which Manu doesn't even come close to. I would say that in a 100m sprint, Manu will not even break into 12s. You can tell by the way he runs. Lomu on the other hand, for a huge guy, was very quick off the mark.

<<Physical>>

Manu:

Height 190 cm
Weight 112 kg

100m time - unknown

Lomu:

Height 1.96 m
Weight 125 kg

100m time - 10.8s (in his prime)

If you were to play each of these players in the opposite code, I think Lomu would definitely do better in League, than Manu in Union, IMO.

And btw, Lomu never had major injuries. Obviously I'm not talking about Lomu's kidneys issues, as we're comparing the players in their prime.

I'm not sure where I stand on this issue, but you're suggesting that NRL journeymen nobodies are better than international union players? Sure there are some world class players in the NRL but the huge majority are not, plus rugby league wingers have that terrible habit of coming in and trying for a spot tackle which leaves the winger unmarked and only comes off 2/5 times at best.

Blatant generalisation but in the same spirit, I would go in the other way and say that the majority of wingers in todays NRL are better than the majority of international wingers Jonah faced in the 90's.

Also your view on spot tackles is flawed. Most of the time they work but hey! It's not like we're going to all agree and reach a consensus here anyway!

I'm saying today's NRL journeymen wingers >> Union wingers from the 90's.

Can't really imagine how you could disagree here

Agree that it's silly when you're not having this discussion over a few beers but a couple of counters here anyway:

* Apart from his much publicised horror night 3 FUCKIN YEARS AGO (just sick of hearing about it - Manu has moved past it, why can't everybody else) Manu deals with a LOT of high ball and it's one of his strengths, especially offensively.
* Manu is deceptively fast. Most people and opoosition wingers don't realise just how fast he is, he is contiually surprising commentators actually. In one case he chased down Matt Bowen - a noted speedster and in another, look at the video of him scoring against Cronulla last year in round 2 (or 3 - I can't remember) Luke covell (not a noted speedster - granted) hesitated for a fraction of a second and Manu with hardly any room bolted down the sideline and beat him to score in the corner. It was an exceptional wingers try because he showed great instinct, speed and agility to make the most of what little space he had to work with and beat Covell completely for pace.

Probably because I'm older and can remember a lot more of the wingers from that era, I'm not saying that the union wingers were superior, just that I don't think it's as clearcut as you're making out.

because you can only compare against the people they played against you numpty
union wingers from the 90s with today's training etc

or are you saying that Napoleon isnt a better general than Jerry Mateparae cos Jerry has armoured vehicles and would kick Napoleon's arse?

I remember them quite well and I agree with him completely.

ps. How old (or young) do you think Gummi is? He's not *that* much younger than you mate!

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! Hold the phone there buddy.

Is Mr Old Timey cricketers are better than current cricketers singing a different tune??

I don't think Manu is slow. But if we comparing two athletes physical attributes, there will be night and day between pace of Manu and Jonah. And let's face it, Manu doesn't score his tries due to his pace. Just raw power and strengths. Lomu, while a lot quicker than Manu, was also strong and powerful, but he also was able to change direction of his running. I've never seen Manu run any other direction but straight. One case where Manu chased down a speedster isn't a solid evidence for his speed. The guy might have had a sore hammy for all we know. Shit, I run the same 40m time as Hosea Gear, but that doesn't mean I'm a better winger. Again, if we just looking at speed, Manu isn't a speedster Jonah once was.

Cullen's talent btw wasn't just his speed. It was his ability to change the running angle without losing any speed, and that's very hard to achieve.

In saying that (about Manu), I've spoke with someone today who has a lot to do with Warriors, and he said that Manu is "one" of the quickest in the squad. Go figure.

Old time cricketers were more dominant against their opponents than players today, thus they were better

let's imagine in one era the average average was 30 and one guy averaged 50. let's say today the average average is 45 and one guy averages 60. the guy who averaged 50 is better than the guy who averages 60

yeah, cullen ran brilliant angles. anyway, union has much better wingers overall than league (currently). on the whole: usually bigger, faster, more agile.

But those averages were against players of the same age therefore your original statement still stands.

You just defeated yourself.

Ima still gonna disagree with ya son!

\\

Not sure you understand relativities
Not EVERY old time player > every NEW player
However, the very best players of the old days > best players today
AND in that case some of them were SO good that even in absolute rather than relative terms they would dominate today

Thus Manu < Lomu
In the future there might be a guy twice as fast and strong as Manu, but if he isn't as much better than the average winger as Manu is, he won't be better than Manu.

Turns out they might be mixing it up in Fight for Life

Manu Vatuvei has way better kidneys !

So about this...

hahahahahaha!

Wisely I did not add to this stupid debate!

Looking back Manu has either been average or injured for probably 70% of his career? Is that fair?

The other 30% being brilliant on attack and fairly solid on D.



gc.