ellis9 wrote:Look I have no problem in people disagreeing with me but that statement is a bit ridiculous. Obviously some things are facts so cannot be viewed as an opinion. The sky is blue- fact not opinion. The world is round- fact not opinion. Leicester Tigers are the most successful English club- fact not opinion.
If you look at my earlier post, I explained why I think Farrell is rubbish but as you have failed to recognise it I'll say it again. Farrell offers only a kicking game. If you want that from a fly half then fine but I want a fly half who can run the game and make things happen and have various skills on his armoury to make sure they can get the ball out wide, make things happen and mix it up. Farrell does not offer this, so therefore, I think he is rubbish.
To put it simply. If you buy a product and when you use it, it does not do what you want it to, you would say it's rubbish and either throw it away or put it away and never it again.
If you buy a laptop and use it to wash your car, it won't do what you want it to. It doesn't mean that it's rubbish, it just means that you should have bought a sponge.
Farrell does what he does very well. And it's not as if he has no running game and no playmaking skills. There are FHs who do that better - Ford, Cipriani, Burns, Slade - but he wasn't exactly an immobile kicker when he was a try-scoring MOTM in the Premiership final.
If you want a reliable kicking option, a solid defender, a decent running threat and a competent playmaker than you'll get that in Farrell. If you want someone to take the ball to the gainline, make breaks and put runners through gaps, then there are better FHs out there. Which does not - by any stretch of the imagination - make Farrell rubbish.
But if you think that being extremely good at several of the core skills of an international FH makes Farrell rubbish, what's your problem with Burgess? Is it that he's not a front-line lineout option and you'd like your blindside to be a lineout option, therefore he's rubbish?