<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The World&#8217;s Top 50 Players</title>
	<link>http://blogs.sarugby.com/2009/01/14/the-worlds-top-50-players/</link>
	<description>Official SARugby.com Blog</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 16:32:31 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Gareth Rosslee</title>
		<link>http://blogs.sarugby.com/2009/01/14/the-worlds-top-50-players/#comment-20926</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 08:37:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.sarugby.com/2009/01/14/the-worlds-top-50-players/#comment-20926</guid>
					<description>Sorry Anon!  That was a rather shocking mis-count on my behalf.  

Look - i think these lists are always going to be debatable &amp; there will always be room to criticise.  That said it's not a baaaad list in the end.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry Anon!  That was a rather shocking mis-count on my behalf.  </p>
<p>Look - i think these lists are always going to be debatable &#038; there will always be room to criticise.  That said it&#8217;s not a baaaad list in the end.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Charlie</title>
		<link>http://blogs.sarugby.com/2009/01/14/the-worlds-top-50-players/#comment-20922</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 10:31:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.sarugby.com/2009/01/14/the-worlds-top-50-players/#comment-20922</guid>
					<description>PS Carter should be No. 1</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>PS Carter should be No. 1
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Charlie</title>
		<link>http://blogs.sarugby.com/2009/01/14/the-worlds-top-50-players/#comment-20921</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 10:28:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.sarugby.com/2009/01/14/the-worlds-top-50-players/#comment-20921</guid>
					<description>Smit at 50 but no place for Bismark????</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Smit at 50 but no place for Bismark????
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Luway</title>
		<link>http://blogs.sarugby.com/2009/01/14/the-worlds-top-50-players/#comment-20919</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 07:20:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.sarugby.com/2009/01/14/the-worlds-top-50-players/#comment-20919</guid>
					<description>A random list... Carter should be at 2, Nonu should be nowhere near 13th... and don't get me started on Spies. Tuquiri under-rated as ever, whilst O'Driscoll is nowhere near as low as they rate him. How Chabal cracks the 50 heaven knows, Smit only at 50 and no place for J Fourie... give me a break..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A random list&#8230; Carter should be at 2, Nonu should be nowhere near 13th&#8230; and don&#8217;t get me started on Spies. Tuquiri under-rated as ever, whilst O&#8217;Driscoll is nowhere near as low as they rate him. How Chabal cracks the 50 heaven knows, Smit only at 50 and no place for J Fourie&#8230; give me a break..
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: barter</title>
		<link>http://blogs.sarugby.com/2009/01/14/the-worlds-top-50-players/#comment-20918</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 07:05:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.sarugby.com/2009/01/14/the-worlds-top-50-players/#comment-20918</guid>
					<description>i think burger should be nearer the top of the list - he is just unrivalled in terms of aggression and workrate!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i think burger should be nearer the top of the list - he is just unrivalled in terms of aggression and workrate!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://blogs.sarugby.com/2009/01/14/the-worlds-top-50-players/#comment-20913</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 14:53:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.sarugby.com/2009/01/14/the-worlds-top-50-players/#comment-20913</guid>
					<description>Sorry Gareth, but would you like to rephrase this sentance-
With three Springboks in the top 10 and a large number scattered throughout the rest of the list it makes for very interesting reading.

I don't mean to burst your bubble or anything like that, but there is actually FOUR Springboks in the top 10.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry Gareth, but would you like to rephrase this sentance-<br />
With three Springboks in the top 10 and a large number scattered throughout the rest of the list it makes for very interesting reading.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t mean to burst your bubble or anything like that, but there is actually FOUR Springboks in the top 10.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
