Pretty hard not to feel inspired by that.

Quote oxford-pie-eater="oxford-pie-eater"McBanana explains all on the beeb - news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 200328.stm ...and his summation of what Chase will add to the England team: "He's (Rangi) got something different to a lot of most players. He's certainaly a very attacking player; brings a lot of new dimensions to some things we could possibly do if he makes the team, and would certainly make an impact." Well, I guess he's entirely unique then - cos we have nobody who can attack or offer anything a bit different?! Don't get a job in marketing or PR, will ya Steve!'" That's an unfair summation of what he said. Implying that he has something different to other players (which is entirely justified) and then making the connection that it is because he is an attacking player and they aren't is a connection you have made not him.

Quote oxford-pie-eater="oxford-pie-eater"McBanana explains all on the beeb - news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 200328.stm ...and his summation of what Chase will add to the England team: "He's (Rangi) got something different to a lot of most players. He's certainaly a very attacking player; brings a lot of new dimensions to some things we could possibly do if he makes the team, and would certainly make an impact." Well, I guess he's entirely unique then - cos we have nobody who can attack or offer anything a bit different?! Don't get a job in marketing or PR, will ya Steve!'" That's an unfair summation of what he said. Implying that he has something different to other players (which is entirely justified) and then making the connection that it is because he is an attacking player and they aren't is a connection you have made not him.

He's quoted, word for word man?! Sorry for making a connection between two things that have come out of his mouth, one after the other! How exactly would you interpret what he says?



My point being, when you attempt to sell an idea or concept, you normally fall back on what is unique about it, and how it's going to add to what you've already got. If what you're saying is different about him, is that he's different, that doesn't work. You might as well say, he's different because he's a kiwi.

Get him in the government - he talks as much waffle as they do.

And to think I was looking forward to hearing his thinking behind Rangi's selection...

I thought I'd just mention the bits that suit my own argument like everyone else on here!

Sporting nationality is about much more than places and dates, where were you born, how long did you live in this place or that.



It's about feeling like you belong somewhere, like you want to represent that place on a sports field.



If Rangi Chase genuinely feels that he's English and the RLIF rules say he's entitled to do so, I've no problem with him pulling on and England shirt. I'd feel the same way if Gareth Widdop had said he felt more Australian than English and declined to play for England.

Right. I was hoping you'd say that. Because in your quote, you make out that he made the sentence that Chase brought something new to the squad, and then in the next sentence went on about his attacking abilities and you yourself have made the implication that one follows on from the other whereas it is reasonable to assume they didn't.



It's a classic case of someone trying too hard to find fault in someone where none exists.

Sorry. "Reasonable to assume?" You don't have to "assume" anything - just watch the video.



Fortnuately, I have better things to do than look for reasons to find fault in McNamara, and he does a good enough job of providing them on a plate anyhow

Then stop doing it.



I'm sure you speak with all the wit and sophistication of Oscar Wilde btw.