Skip to content
  • Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

  • Tipping
  • Team Sheets
  • Highlights
  • Results
    • All Blacks

      Search every All Blacks Test. Filter results by year, opposition, location, venue, city and RWC stage

    • Super Rugby

      Search every Super Rugby since match 1996

    • NPC

      Search NPC results. Only first division matches from 1976-2005. All results from the 14 team competition (2006-present) are included

Lincoln McClutchie article

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Sports Talk
hawkesbay
32 Posts 11 Posters 1.1k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • Canes4lifeC Canes4life

    @Stargazer I haven't seen enough of those players to make a judgement but all I know is Morgan has a few wraps on him from what I hear.

    I like McClutchie and I was actually surprised he wasn't selected on a full contract this year, hopefully his Japan stint is only a one-off because he does look to have the goods as a gun first five.

    Who is the St Kent's first five that Wellington have signed? I know they've signed Ruben Love and Aiden Morgan, but haven't heard about any other additions to the academy.

    BovidaeB Offline
    BovidaeB Offline
    Bovidae
    wrote on last edited by
    #9

    @Canes4life

    Ruben Love is a 1st 5/fullback so could be competing against Morgan.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • HigginsH Offline
      HigginsH Offline
      Higgins
      wrote on last edited by Higgins
      #10

      Some players like Bryn Gatland, James Marshall, and JGB must be possesses of some sort of special rugby talent yet to be unleashed to the general viewing rugby public if they deemed to be of better quality than McLutchie when it comes to awarding Super Rugby pay cheques.

      BonesB StargazerS 2 Replies Last reply
      0
      • HigginsH Higgins

        Some players like Bryn Gatland, James Marshall, and JGB must be possesses of some sort of special rugby talent yet to be unleashed to the general viewing rugby public if they deemed to be of better quality than McLutchie when it comes to awarding Super Rugby pay cheques.

        BonesB Offline
        BonesB Offline
        Bones
        wrote on last edited by
        #11

        @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

        Some players like Bryn Gatland, James Marshall, and JGB must be possesses of some sort of special rugby talent yet to be unleashed to the general viewing rugby public if they deemed to be of better quality than McLutchie when it comes to awarding Super Rugby pay cheques.

        I know right! It can't be something tangible or just that they're better players - obviously if all these guys from HB think that the HB player is waaaay better then there must be a conspiracy afoot I reckon. It can't be that others (probably not from HB) think they're a better investment this year.

        NepiaN TimT SmudgeS 3 Replies Last reply
        4
        • BonesB Bones

          @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

          Some players like Bryn Gatland, James Marshall, and JGB must be possesses of some sort of special rugby talent yet to be unleashed to the general viewing rugby public if they deemed to be of better quality than McLutchie when it comes to awarding Super Rugby pay cheques.

          I know right! It can't be something tangible or just that they're better players - obviously if all these guys from HB think that the HB player is waaaay better then there must be a conspiracy afoot I reckon. It can't be that others (probably not from HB) think they're a better investment this year.

          NepiaN Offline
          NepiaN Offline
          Nepia
          wrote on last edited by
          #12

          @Bones said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

          @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

          Some players like Bryn Gatland, James Marshall, and JGB must be possesses of some sort of special rugby talent yet to be unleashed to the general viewing rugby public if they deemed to be of better quality than McLutchie when it comes to awarding Super Rugby pay cheques.

          I know right! It can't be something tangible or just that they're better players - obviously if all these guys from HB think that the HB player is waaaay better then there must be a conspiracy afoot I reckon. It can't be that others (probably not from HB) think they're a better investment this year.

          We all know it dates back to 1926 when the Wellington RU for a brief moment thought they'd won the Shield 5 - 8, but it was a missprint and the actual score was 55-8. They've been waging war on us ever since. JGB and James Marshall are their latest dirty bombs in that war. For shame, for shame.

          BonesB HigginsH 2 Replies Last reply
          1
          • NepiaN Nepia

            @Bones said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

            @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

            Some players like Bryn Gatland, James Marshall, and JGB must be possesses of some sort of special rugby talent yet to be unleashed to the general viewing rugby public if they deemed to be of better quality than McLutchie when it comes to awarding Super Rugby pay cheques.

            I know right! It can't be something tangible or just that they're better players - obviously if all these guys from HB think that the HB player is waaaay better then there must be a conspiracy afoot I reckon. It can't be that others (probably not from HB) think they're a better investment this year.

            We all know it dates back to 1926 when the Wellington RU for a brief moment thought they'd won the Shield 5 - 8, but it was a missprint and the actual score was 55-8. They've been waging war on us ever since. JGB and James Marshall are their latest dirty bombs in that war. For shame, for shame.

            BonesB Offline
            BonesB Offline
            Bones
            wrote on last edited by
            #13

            @Nepia always the bridesmaid!

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • HigginsH Higgins

              Some players like Bryn Gatland, James Marshall, and JGB must be possesses of some sort of special rugby talent yet to be unleashed to the general viewing rugby public if they deemed to be of better quality than McLutchie when it comes to awarding Super Rugby pay cheques.

              StargazerS Offline
              StargazerS Offline
              Stargazer
              wrote on last edited by
              #14

              @Higgins Gatland is on a two-year contract that was signed before McClutchie made his Mitre 10 Cup debut, so you can hardly say that Gatland should not have been signed because McClutchie has shown so much promise. Gatland's contract expires this year and he hasn't played this year, yet, so who knows?

              JGB's contract was extended with one year about 12 months ago; the signs were on the wall by then, but still, signed before the 2019 Mitre 10 Cup season in which McClutchie showed he's worthy of a SR contract. It will become more interesting if JGB is re-signed this year at the detriment of McClutchie, but Marshall's and Fletcher Smith's contracts also expire this year.

              I can understand Marshall's re-signing on 2 Oct 2019, because he brings experience that both Fletcher Smith and McClutchie didn't/don't have. The Canes needed that experience after BB left. But ... he's been injured and has only played 22 minutes this year. 22 very average minutes. I don't see any justification for him to be re-signed again.

              Fletcher Smith's contract - signed in 2018 - also expires this year .....

              1 Reply Last reply
              1
              • NepiaN Nepia

                @Bones said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                Some players like Bryn Gatland, James Marshall, and JGB must be possesses of some sort of special rugby talent yet to be unleashed to the general viewing rugby public if they deemed to be of better quality than McLutchie when it comes to awarding Super Rugby pay cheques.

                I know right! It can't be something tangible or just that they're better players - obviously if all these guys from HB think that the HB player is waaaay better then there must be a conspiracy afoot I reckon. It can't be that others (probably not from HB) think they're a better investment this year.

                We all know it dates back to 1926 when the Wellington RU for a brief moment thought they'd won the Shield 5 - 8, but it was a missprint and the actual score was 55-8. They've been waging war on us ever since. JGB and James Marshall are their latest dirty bombs in that war. For shame, for shame.

                HigginsH Offline
                HigginsH Offline
                Higgins
                wrote on last edited by Higgins
                #15

                @Nepia Poor form from you as the score in 1926 was an even bigger thrashing than the tally you quoted.
                Hawkes Bay 58 (Bert Grenside (5), Jackie Blake (2), Bert Cooke, Cyril Brownlie, John Swain, Edward Single and Lance Johnnson all with tries. George Nepia (7) and Grenside (1) knocked over conversions whilst Nepia also did the honours with a penalty.)
                Wellington 08

                Inflation adjusted for 2020 points values that scoreline translates to

                Hawkes Bay 84 - 09 Wellington

                BonesB boobooB 2 Replies Last reply
                1
                • HigginsH Higgins

                  @Nepia Poor form from you as the score in 1926 was an even bigger thrashing than the tally you quoted.
                  Hawkes Bay 58 (Bert Grenside (5), Jackie Blake (2), Bert Cooke, Cyril Brownlie, John Swain, Edward Single and Lance Johnnson all with tries. George Nepia (7) and Grenside (1) knocked over conversions whilst Nepia also did the honours with a penalty.)
                  Wellington 08

                  Inflation adjusted for 2020 points values that scoreline translates to

                  Hawkes Bay 84 - 09 Wellington

                  BonesB Offline
                  BonesB Offline
                  Bones
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #16

                  @Higgins so... we're improving?

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • HigginsH Higgins

                    @Nepia Poor form from you as the score in 1926 was an even bigger thrashing than the tally you quoted.
                    Hawkes Bay 58 (Bert Grenside (5), Jackie Blake (2), Bert Cooke, Cyril Brownlie, John Swain, Edward Single and Lance Johnnson all with tries. George Nepia (7) and Grenside (1) knocked over conversions whilst Nepia also did the honours with a penalty.)
                    Wellington 08

                    Inflation adjusted for 2020 points values that scoreline translates to

                    Hawkes Bay 84 - 09 Wellington

                    boobooB Online
                    boobooB Online
                    booboo
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #17

                    @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                    @Nepia Poor form from you as the score in 1926 was an even bigger thrashing than the tally you quoted.
                    Hawkes Bay 58 (Bert Grenside (5), Jackie Blake (2), Bert Cooke, Cyril Brownlie, John Swain, Edward Single and Lance Johnnson all with tries. George Nepia (7) and Grenside (1) knocked over conversions whilst Nepia also did the honours with a penalty.)
                    Wellington 08

                    Inflation adjusted for 2020 points values that scoreline translates to

                    Hawkes Bay 84 - 09 Wellington

                    Genuine question. How were Wellie's points made up?

                    Was there a goal from a mark or something?

                    Because tries back then were 3pts right?

                    So I had assumed try(3) + con(2) + pen(3) = 8, and nowadays that would be 10 (5+2+3). Unless you meant 10?

                    Thanks in anticipation.

                    NepiaN HigginsH 2 Replies Last reply
                    0
                    • boobooB booboo

                      @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                      @Nepia Poor form from you as the score in 1926 was an even bigger thrashing than the tally you quoted.
                      Hawkes Bay 58 (Bert Grenside (5), Jackie Blake (2), Bert Cooke, Cyril Brownlie, John Swain, Edward Single and Lance Johnnson all with tries. George Nepia (7) and Grenside (1) knocked over conversions whilst Nepia also did the honours with a penalty.)
                      Wellington 08

                      Inflation adjusted for 2020 points values that scoreline translates to

                      Hawkes Bay 84 - 09 Wellington

                      Genuine question. How were Wellie's points made up?

                      Was there a goal from a mark or something?

                      Because tries back then were 3pts right?

                      So I had assumed try(3) + con(2) + pen(3) = 8, and nowadays that would be 10 (5+2+3). Unless you meant 10?

                      Thanks in anticipation.

                      NepiaN Offline
                      NepiaN Offline
                      Nepia
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #18

                      @booboo said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                      @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                      @Nepia Poor form from you as the score in 1926 was an even bigger thrashing than the tally you quoted.
                      Hawkes Bay 58 (Bert Grenside (5), Jackie Blake (2), Bert Cooke, Cyril Brownlie, John Swain, Edward Single and Lance Johnnson all with tries. George Nepia (7) and Grenside (1) knocked over conversions whilst Nepia also did the honours with a penalty.)
                      Wellington 08

                      Inflation adjusted for 2020 points values that scoreline translates to

                      Hawkes Bay 84 - 09 Wellington

                      Genuine question. How were Wellie's points made up?

                      Was there a goal from a mark or something?

                      Because tries back then were 3pts right?

                      So I had assumed try(3) + con(2) + pen(3) = 8, and nowadays that would be 10 (5+2+3). Unless you meant 10?

                      Thanks in anticipation.

                      You are correct.

                      boobooB 1 Reply Last reply
                      1
                      • NepiaN Nepia

                        @booboo said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                        @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                        @Nepia Poor form from you as the score in 1926 was an even bigger thrashing than the tally you quoted.
                        Hawkes Bay 58 (Bert Grenside (5), Jackie Blake (2), Bert Cooke, Cyril Brownlie, John Swain, Edward Single and Lance Johnnson all with tries. George Nepia (7) and Grenside (1) knocked over conversions whilst Nepia also did the honours with a penalty.)
                        Wellington 08

                        Inflation adjusted for 2020 points values that scoreline translates to

                        Hawkes Bay 84 - 09 Wellington

                        Genuine question. How were Wellie's points made up?

                        Was there a goal from a mark or something?

                        Because tries back then were 3pts right?

                        So I had assumed try(3) + con(2) + pen(3) = 8, and nowadays that would be 10 (5+2+3). Unless you meant 10?

                        Thanks in anticipation.

                        You are correct.

                        boobooB Online
                        boobooB Online
                        booboo
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #19

                        @Nepia so 84-10. Couldn't stop them getting double figures ... 🙂

                        NepiaN 1 Reply Last reply
                        2
                        • boobooB booboo

                          @Nepia so 84-10. Couldn't stop them getting double figures ... 🙂

                          NepiaN Offline
                          NepiaN Offline
                          Nepia
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #20

                          @booboo said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                          @Nepia so 84-10. Couldn't stop them getting double figures ... 🙂

                          We had to let them save a little bit of mana.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          1
                          • BonesB Bones

                            @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                            Some players like Bryn Gatland, James Marshall, and JGB must be possesses of some sort of special rugby talent yet to be unleashed to the general viewing rugby public if they deemed to be of better quality than McLutchie when it comes to awarding Super Rugby pay cheques.

                            I know right! It can't be something tangible or just that they're better players - obviously if all these guys from HB think that the HB player is waaaay better then there must be a conspiracy afoot I reckon. It can't be that others (probably not from HB) think they're a better investment this year.

                            TimT Away
                            TimT Away
                            Tim
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #21

                            @Bones Michael Little is a good counter-example to the idea that the best players are signed into Super Rugby squads. He was much better than many midfield players in NZ squads (especially at the Blues), but had to go to Japan to get a full contract.

                            With Little it was a poor Blues organisation missing out, perhaps McClutchie has missed out at the Highlanders due to their pretty average coaches?

                            StargazerS BonesB 2 Replies Last reply
                            2
                            • TimT Tim

                              @Bones Michael Little is a good counter-example to the idea that the best players are signed into Super Rugby squads. He was much better than many midfield players in NZ squads (especially at the Blues), but had to go to Japan to get a full contract.

                              With Little it was a poor Blues organisation missing out, perhaps McClutchie has missed out at the Highlanders due to their pretty average coaches?

                              StargazerS Offline
                              StargazerS Offline
                              Stargazer
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #22

                              @Tim I think he mainly missed out on Hurricanes selection. They should have offered McClutchie a (full) contract instead of James Marshall, who didn't even play NPC in 2019! The Canes made more dubious selections, such as the Kobus van Wyk signing that they didn't need.

                              Canes4lifeC 1 Reply Last reply
                              2
                              • StargazerS Stargazer

                                @Tim I think he mainly missed out on Hurricanes selection. They should have offered McClutchie a (full) contract instead of James Marshall, who didn't even play NPC in 2019! The Canes made more dubious selections, such as the Kobus van Wyk signing that they didn't need.

                                Canes4lifeC Offline
                                Canes4lifeC Offline
                                Canes4life
                                wrote on last edited by Canes4life
                                #23

                                @Stargazer yeah the Canes had some odd selections this year so I can see your frustration. They seem to have their mind made up no matter who is in form. Case and point with Teariki Ben-Nicholas, he should have earned himself a Canes contract after playing the house down for two years at NPC and for the Canes development, however they decided to give it to Murphy Taramai which was a left field decision.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                2
                                • boobooB booboo

                                  @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                                  @Nepia Poor form from you as the score in 1926 was an even bigger thrashing than the tally you quoted.
                                  Hawkes Bay 58 (Bert Grenside (5), Jackie Blake (2), Bert Cooke, Cyril Brownlie, John Swain, Edward Single and Lance Johnnson all with tries. George Nepia (7) and Grenside (1) knocked over conversions whilst Nepia also did the honours with a penalty.)
                                  Wellington 08

                                  Inflation adjusted for 2020 points values that scoreline translates to

                                  Hawkes Bay 84 - 09 Wellington

                                  Genuine question. How were Wellie's points made up?

                                  Was there a goal from a mark or something?

                                  Because tries back then were 3pts right?

                                  So I had assumed try(3) + con(2) + pen(3) = 8, and nowadays that would be 10 (5+2+3). Unless you meant 10?

                                  Thanks in anticipation.

                                  HigginsH Offline
                                  HigginsH Offline
                                  Higgins
                                  wrote on last edited by Higgins
                                  #24

                                  @booboo Oops you are quite right, forgot to credit Wellington with the two additional points to the try awarded to E. F.. Barry. Mark Nicholls contributed the extra points with a conversion and a penalty. My error is simply put dowen to the fact that the opposition side of the scoreboard contained just the one nail to hang their tally on such was the dominance of the Bay in those days.

                                  SnowyS 1 Reply Last reply
                                  1
                                  • HigginsH Higgins

                                    @booboo Oops you are quite right, forgot to credit Wellington with the two additional points to the try awarded to E. F.. Barry. Mark Nicholls contributed the extra points with a conversion and a penalty. My error is simply put dowen to the fact that the opposition side of the scoreboard contained just the one nail to hang their tally on such was the dominance of the Bay in those days.

                                    SnowyS Offline
                                    SnowyS Offline
                                    Snowy
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #25

                                    @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                                    @booboo Oops you are quite right, forgot to credit Wellington with the two additional points to the try awarded to E. F.. Barry. Mark Nicholls contributed the extra points with a conversion and a penalty. My error is simply put dowen to the fact that the opposition side of the scoreboard contained just the one nail to hang their tally on such was the dominance of the Bay in those days.

                                    How old are you?! You are either ancient and remember the match, or better at googling results than me. Both quite likely.

                                    I actually did look to see where the mathS was wrong and couldn't find how Wellington's paltry points were scored.

                                    NepiaN 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • SnowyS Snowy

                                      @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                                      @booboo Oops you are quite right, forgot to credit Wellington with the two additional points to the try awarded to E. F.. Barry. Mark Nicholls contributed the extra points with a conversion and a penalty. My error is simply put dowen to the fact that the opposition side of the scoreboard contained just the one nail to hang their tally on such was the dominance of the Bay in those days.

                                      How old are you?! You are either ancient and remember the match, or better at googling results than me. Both quite likely.

                                      I actually did look to see where the mathS was wrong and couldn't find how Wellington's paltry points were scored.

                                      NepiaN Offline
                                      NepiaN Offline
                                      Nepia
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #26

                                      @Snowy said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                                      @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                                      @booboo Oops you are quite right, forgot to credit Wellington with the two additional points to the try awarded to E. F.. Barry. Mark Nicholls contributed the extra points with a conversion and a penalty. My error is simply put dowen to the fact that the opposition side of the scoreboard contained just the one nail to hang their tally on such was the dominance of the Bay in those days.

                                      How old are you?! You are either ancient and remember the match, or better at googling results than me. Both quite likely.

                                      I actually did look to see where the mathS was wrong and couldn't find how Wellington's paltry points were scored.

                                      Wiki is your friend. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranfurly_Shield_1920–29#1926

                                      SnowyS 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • NepiaN Nepia

                                        @Snowy said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                                        @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                                        @booboo Oops you are quite right, forgot to credit Wellington with the two additional points to the try awarded to E. F.. Barry. Mark Nicholls contributed the extra points with a conversion and a penalty. My error is simply put dowen to the fact that the opposition side of the scoreboard contained just the one nail to hang their tally on such was the dominance of the Bay in those days.

                                        How old are you?! You are either ancient and remember the match, or better at googling results than me. Both quite likely.

                                        I actually did look to see where the mathS was wrong and couldn't find how Wellington's paltry points were scored.

                                        Wiki is your friend. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranfurly_Shield_1920–29#1926

                                        SnowyS Offline
                                        SnowyS Offline
                                        Snowy
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #27

                                        @Nepia Paah, who uses that.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        1
                                        • BonesB Bones

                                          @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                                          Some players like Bryn Gatland, James Marshall, and JGB must be possesses of some sort of special rugby talent yet to be unleashed to the general viewing rugby public if they deemed to be of better quality than McLutchie when it comes to awarding Super Rugby pay cheques.

                                          I know right! It can't be something tangible or just that they're better players - obviously if all these guys from HB think that the HB player is waaaay better then there must be a conspiracy afoot I reckon. It can't be that others (probably not from HB) think they're a better investment this year.

                                          SmudgeS Offline
                                          SmudgeS Offline
                                          Smudge
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #28

                                          @Bones said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                                          @Higgins said in Lincoln McClutchie article:

                                          Some players like Bryn Gatland, James Marshall, and JGB must be possesses of some sort of special rugby talent yet to be unleashed to the general viewing rugby public if they deemed to be of better quality than McLutchie when it comes to awarding Super Rugby pay cheques.

                                          I know right! It can't be something tangible or just that they're better players - obviously if all these guys from HB think that the HB player is waaaay better then there must be a conspiracy afoot I reckon. It can't be that others (probably not from HB) think they're a better investment this year.

                                          Bones, how did you find your way to the Magpies campfire with all those circled wagons in the way?

                                          StargazerS BonesB 2 Replies Last reply
                                          1
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Search
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Search