Positions

[morley pie eater]

No They are not the same thing (synonymous) Meaningless refers to the unintelligible That's educational not pedantry mate

For God's sake mate, give it a rest. You're making a fool of yourself.

meaningless
/ˈmiːnɪŋlɪs/
adjective
having no meaning or significance.

With all due respect, English was my major at university. I don't need schooling by someone who can't even use punctuation or capital letters properly and clearly thinks he's more intelligent than he is.

Bang on the nose

[TrueBlueWarrior]

Every single player you have listed above Flash is an international player! The players suggested originally by our fans aren’t international level! My simple point is the better player you are the easier you find it to play multiple positions! The players some on here are asking to change positions struggle to perform consistently in a position they play in every week!

Actually, Beven French isn't an international player. Miski, on the other hand, is. So is Toby King. You're seeing what you want to see.

It's a truism to say that players with greater ability (and so more likely to gain international honours) would more likely be able to play to a higher standard and would therefore, by extension, be able to play multiple positions to that same higher standard. I'm not sure how that contradicts the statement that "it's not unusual for players to play more than one position to a high standard". Why should the better players be excluded from this statement? How is that even relevant?

To answer Nathan's point; I'm not suggesting Miski or King would transition into another position. I don't know. However, equally, you can't say they wouldn't. You don't know. Your reaction to ANY suggested positional change is to rule it out. Yet evidence clearly shows that it is often very successful. At the end of the day it is merely opinion on whether a given player would or wouldn't succeed until they are actually tried there and it is proven one way or the other.

I remember much opposition to Tomkins being moved from stand off as he had never played full back and was obviously a potential star at 6. Worked out ok though, didn't it?

So does Bevan French not have more ability than Miski and King? If Bevan French was English/Lebanese would he be an international? Could Miski or King play stand off! It seems you are seeing what you want to see to support your weak argument that poorer quality players could change position and be a huge success! Give me examples of players at the same ability level as the players who you are suggesting change position completely that have been a huge success and better players once they have! Powell, King, Miski, etc. that calibre of player.

When the players you want to see change position, although I have a strong feeling that they won’t as Peet will probably see that they need to still work on the position they are currently in first and changing their position will not work, let’s see how they do?

[DaveO]

The whole intention of this thread was to relay the words that Tomkins said around positional changes to give some food for thought to those who suggest random changes.

Of course we see things like KPP or Smithies going to prop but that isn’t the same as Miski to Centre or French to Loose or King to second row.

I get it. Not sure most do.

[DaveO]

Kallum Watkins - SL centre and back rower.
Johnny Lomax - SL fullback and Half (also played both at international level)
Beven French - SL wing and Fullback
Jack Welsby - SL fullback and stand off.
Sam Tomkins - SL fullback and stand off (also played internationally in both positions)
KPP - SL back rower and centre and last night's MOM.
George Williams - SL hooker and half
Arthur Morgue - SL stand off, scrum half and Fullback

Same comment applies to this list as that Flash ca e up with, I don’t know enough about the non Wigan players to comment but the rest are equally poor examples. How many games has Williams played at hooker? Is Sam Tomkins now not seen as a full back and no longer as a stand off? The worst one is KPP and suggesting his time at centre is evidence of anything given he was quickly found out by other teams and just wasn’t good at it is a real stretch.

As I said in my other reply, players often transition from one position to another as their career progresses and they get older but don’t often pop up all over the field. Wingers have even ended up as props before now but they don’t go back to playing on the wing.

And the most predictable thing on this forum happens; DaveO pops up with a straw man argument. Please point out where I said these weren't transitions as a career progressed. The discussion was about players being able to play more than one position to a high standard. ALL the examples I have given have done exactly that. No one has even mentioned returning to their previous position except you. Your comments are totally meaningless in the context of the discussion.

As for KPP, he won man of the match from prop on Friday and I absolutely GUARANTEE he will return to the back row at some point.

Oh! And for the record George Williams played a Grand Final at hooker. Is that a good enough standard for you given that SL doesn't have a higher standard than that? Or would you like to pretend again that I said the number of games played was the defining factor?

Utter nonsense. The fact, once, KPP won MoM at centres does not alter the fact that experiment has thankfully not not been repeated and he was found out later. The same applies to Williams. Go on, tell me how many games Williams has played as a no 9 as opposed to a half back. I bet you don’t even need the fingers on one hand to count that.

As to not making it clear player’s transitioned to other positions as their careers progressed where did you actually make it clear that is what you, meant!? You did not. So what exactly is your point?

That you agree with me the examples you gave are of players who switched positions as their career progressed and never went back to previous positions? Or what because I have no idea.

[PJC]

Re use of correct grammar.
I’m just preparing myself for my next round of banter with people I see at the game. It has opened up a whole new meaning to to game analysis .

[archiekeith]

No They are not the same thing (synonymous) Meaningless refers to the unintelligible That's educational not pedantry mate

For God's sake mate, give it a rest. You're making a fool of yourself.

meaningless
/ˈmiːnɪŋlɪs/
adjective
having no meaning or significance.

With all due respect, English was my major at university. I don't need schooling by someone who can't even use punctuation or capital letters properly and clearly thinks he's more intelligent than he is.

Bang on the nose

Yes he does didn't mention I couldn't spell but I'm bang on the nose anyway I see you've not forgiven me for explaining the Meaning of a Lancastrian

[Flash]

Every single player you have listed above Flash is an international player! The players suggested originally by our fans aren’t international level! My simple point is the better player you are the easier you find it to play multiple positions! The players some on here are asking to change positions struggle to perform consistently in a position they play in every week!

Actually, Beven French isn't an international player. Miski, on the other hand, is. So is Toby King. You're seeing what you want to see.

It's a truism to say that players with greater ability (and so more likely to gain international honours) would more likely be able to play to a higher standard and would therefore, by extension, be able to play multiple positions to that same higher standard. I'm not sure how that contradicts the statement that "it's not unusual for players to play more than one position to a high standard". Why should the better players be excluded from this statement? How is that even relevant?

To answer Nathan's point; I'm not suggesting Miski or King would transition into another position. I don't know. However, equally, you can't say they wouldn't. You don't know. Your reaction to ANY suggested positional change is to rule it out. Yet evidence clearly shows that it is often very successful. At the end of the day it is merely opinion on whether a given player would or wouldn't succeed until they are actually tried there and it is proven one way or the other.

I remember much opposition to Tomkins being moved from stand off as he had never played full back and was obviously a potential star at 6. Worked out ok though, didn't it?

So does Bevan French not have more ability than Miski and King? If Bevan French was English/Lebanese would he be an international? Could Miski or King play stand off! It seems you are seeing what you want to see to support your weak argument that poorer quality players could change position and be a huge success! Give me examples of players at the same ability level as the players who you are suggesting change position completely that have been a huge success and better players once they have! Powell, King, Miski, etc. that calibre of player.

When the players you want to see change position, although I have a strong feeling that they won’t as Peet will probably see that they need to still work on the position they are currently in first and changing their position will not work, let’s see how they do?

Please post the quote where I said the bit in bold.

While I wait (and I'll be waiting a long time) for you to post it, I'll quote what I ACTUALLY said:

"I'm not suggesting Miski or King would transition into another position."

[Flash]

Same comment applies to this list as that Flash ca e up with, I don’t know enough about the non Wigan players to comment but the rest are equally poor examples. How many games has Williams played at hooker? Is Sam Tomkins now not seen as a full back and no longer as a stand off? The worst one is KPP and suggesting his time at centre is evidence of anything given he was quickly found out by other teams and just wasn’t good at it is a real stretch.

As I said in my other reply, players often transition from one position to another as their career progresses and they get older but don’t often pop up all over the field. Wingers have even ended up as props before now but they don’t go back to playing on the wing.

And the most predictable thing on this forum happens; DaveO pops up with a straw man argument. Please point out where I said these weren't transitions as a career progressed. The discussion was about players being able to play more than one position to a high standard. ALL the examples I have given have done exactly that. No one has even mentioned returning to their previous position except you. Your comments are totally meaningless in the context of the discussion.

As for KPP, he won man of the match from prop on Friday and I absolutely GUARANTEE he will return to the back row at some point.

Oh! And for the record George Williams played a Grand Final at hooker. Is that a good enough standard for you given that SL doesn't have a higher standard than that? Or would you like to pretend again that I said the number of games played was the defining factor?

Utter nonsense. The fact, once, KPP won MoM at centres does not alter the fact that experiment has thankfully not not been repeated and he was found out later. The same applies to Williams. Go on, tell me how many games Williams has played as a no 9 as opposed to a half back. I bet you don’t even need the fingers on one hand to count that.

As to not making it clear player’s transitioned to other positions as their careers progressed where did you actually make it clear that is what you, meant!? You did not. So what exactly is your point?

That you agree with me the examples you gave are of players who switched positions as their career progressed and never went back to previous positions? Or what because I have no idea.

Saying "utter nonsense" doesn't make it so Dave. He has won MOM from centre and now prop but because DaveO thinks it doesn't count, that's all that matters! He also gained selection for his country while playing at centre but let's ignore that too shall we as DaveO doesn't agree! Seems that what DaveO thinks is the only criteria DaveO can consider.

All of which is irrelevant anyway. You've picked 2 examples from a list and, because you disagree, think it "proves" your argument. Care to argue about the other 7 or 8 on that list? No, thought not...

As for Williams he played an entire season at hooker, culminating in a Grand Final. What level counts as SL level in your book Dave?

For the last time, whether the transition was over the course of a career is entirely irrelevant! If they played more than one position to a good standard then they qualify for "having played more than one position to a good standard". Can you see it now? In case you're still struggling, the clue is in the wording. You can introduce all the extraneous factors you like but that's not what's being discussed. The timing of said transition was never a factor. Neither was the colour of their hair or if there was an "r" in the month when they made the switch. Keep banging on about it if it makes you feel better but, as ever with you, it's just another straw man argument.

Ditto going back to their previous positions. What the hell relevance has that to whether they played more than one position to a high standard? As it goes, several on my lists have. Tomkins played international 6 again after establishing himself as a fullback. Welsby and Lomax still switch between the two and Lockyer played both internationally! I could add others. Sculthorpe regularly switched between standoff and loose forward, Sinfield between loose and standoff too and even played internationals at hooker! Andy Farrell played prop, reverted to loose and even became a union centre! You're talking "utter nonsense" as you like to say.

However, none of that matters anyway as, again, a prerequisite of "having played more than one position to a high standard" isn't dependant on whether you revert to your old position. Again I refer you to the clue in the wording as you seem to be having trouble understanding the concept.

Just for clarity: "playing more than one position to a high standard" means the player needs to have played more than one position to a high standard. Nothing more. Nothing less. Is that clear enough?

[archiekeith]

Yes it 's it's an example of predicate logic. The clouds(subject) the water vapour (predicate) The predicate tells one something about the subject. It's also a propersition,an assertion having a truth value true or false dare I ask is do you now understand I've said enough Don't want to make a fool of myself any further

Except to point out that "no meaning or significance" is disjunctive therefore if you as you say Dave's comments are meaningless then by the disjunctive
"Or" there is no necessity for reference to the term "significance "

[josie andrews]

Yes it 's it's an example of predicate logic. The clouds(subject) the water vapour (predicate) The predicate tells one something about the subject. It's also a propersition,an assertion having a truth value true or false dare I ask is do you now understand I've said enough Don't want to make a fool of myself any further

Except to point out that "no meaning or significance" is disjunctive therefore if you as you say Dave's comments are meaningless then by the disjunctive
"Or" there is no necessity for reference to the term "significance "

Why are you quoting yourself?