Hogg is an attacking genius.....

....but his tackling looks like a vulnerability. Still he will be hard to leave on the bench.for the Lions. The pass that released Visser and the little grubber, not too hard and with nice rotation so it sat up....attacking genius. Take the pass, no covoluted attempt to offload in the tackle as all our players now try to do....a simple catch and pass, but done so fast it froze the defender. Lots of smart players emerging up North....Itoje, Seymour, Maitland and Daly all come to mind. But Hogg is the pick of the bunch.

Pffffffffffffffhahahahahaha!

The rugby noob who thinks 50 cap Stuart Hogg is an "emerging" player.

 Hogg is a great player, but he has been around for years so the late discovery by Mozart is a joke.   He has always been top class - but Mozart "discovered" him only this year.    

'Hogg and Russell epitomise dynamic, emerging Scotland side Flower of Scotland rang out at a boisterous Murrayfield as Stuart Hogg and Finn Russell - the epitome of an emerging and exciting Scotland side - dazzled to orchestrate their first victory over Wales for 10 years.' ............ LMAOFY!

". . . but Mozart "discovered" him only this year."

Exactly. The doddering old rugby noob described Stuart Hogg as the "new thing" among fullbacks the other day!

LMAO!

Hogg has 50 caps to his name and this self-proclaimed rugby guru has only heard of him in the last few weeks! Too funny for words.

mozart Status: Hall Of Fame Posts: 18874 RE: So why have the Boks had such a horrible year November 29, 2016, 08:47:15 Rugby played by Victims....it had to come to that. All rubbish, any rugby player has an opportunity, even in a losing team, to win his individual contest if he has some self pride. And they do....look for example at a player like Hogg who game in/ game out turns in brilliant performances in a losing Scottish team. ............ The egg flows like the Amazon river........down slumps the Oom, schplott goes Urinal. ............. LMAOFY!!!!!!!

You're quoting your post from November 29 2016?

So that was what . . . 3 or 4 games ago? Oh wow! So you recognized Stuart Hogg when he had what . . . 47 caps?

Genius!

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahaha!

"Hogg the new thing among fullbacks". That is a classic!

Even funnier...... Status: Hall Of Fame Posts: 18875 RE: A good summation of the Joubert blunder October 19, 2015, 13:21:44 A foul on Hogg that wasn't called.....followed by a non offside that was called. I'm not saying it was cheating....I'm saying it was gross incompetence and imprudent haste. The TMO was quite proactive up until those two blunders, where he was awol. They should know they cost Scotland their best moment in 120 years of international rugby. Cloudy it's hard to be measured in the face of such injustice. Beeno is bleating on here but I personally think this was a worse failure of reffing than the Lawrence debacle.

Lie down Urinal you're roadkill again. When will you guys get it.....you always lose.

Wehe . . . the crimson-faced old fool trying to pretend it isn't happening.
I'll give the doddering old clown credit for persistence . . . if it had been me getting things as wrong as that I would have registered a new name and started again.
LMAO!

Let's review the facts....you said I had only just become aware of Hogg. Clearly I rated him BEFORE the current 6 Nations, and was commenting on his involvement back at the WC. Lie down before you hurt yourself. LMAOFY!

 Guys, this ding-dong word play semantics is really getting old.  Disagree with a poster and post your opinion, but every flippen thread results in some kiddies half-hour mud-slinging competition.
Surely we are RUGBY fans and all of us are on different levels and look at players diffidently and get influenced by one or two games etc.  I think if we personalise each and every post then it becomes an egotistical competition as opposed to enriching one another.
Just a thought, there're many "outsiders" reading this message board and I wonder sometimes what they think of the "participants" in these threads. 
Let's try at least OK?

It started with a decent rugby post on my part, but if I'm stupidly attacked, I respond.

". . . word play semantics"?
What are you babbling about, Machiavelli?
This self-important old tosser Moffie . . . the same rugby noob who's busy trying to convince everyone that Pieter-Steph du Toit is a useless player while the overrated donkey Eben Etzebeth is the greatest thing since they reinvented sliced bread . . . this same twit said the other day that 50 cap Stuart Hogg was the "new thing" among fullbacks and - more recently - described him as an "emerging player". I'm just ridiculing the pompous old toad because he's missed the boat by about 4 years yet he's trying to pretend that he's discovered Stuart Hogg . . . when most people who follow the game knew that he was the goods as long ago as 2013!
Now, you may have a problem with me ridiculing the spiteful and childish old fossil but then say so . . . don't try to turn this into semantics or wordplay . . . unless perhaps you have no idea what those mean . . . in which case, rather stick to the words that you do know.
Okay? Clear enough for you?

Here's another way of looking at the Urinal communication.....7% of his posting consists of the letter 'the', You have to go to his 13th most used word to find more than one syllable. The poor fool is practically illiterate......hahaha. 11 6.8750 2. that 5 3.1250 3. to 4 2.5000 4. as 3 1.8750 5. this 3 1.8750 6. he's 3 1.8750 7. old 3 1.8750 8. you 3 1.8750 9. a 2 1.2500 10. is 2 1.2500 11. have 2 1.2500 12. hogg 2 1.2500 13. trying 2 1.2500 14. stuart 2 1.2500 15. player 2 1.2500 16. ridiculing 2 1.2500 17. and 2 1.2500 18. thing 2 1.2500 19. same 2 1.2500 20. was 2 1.2500 21. pretend 1 0.6250 22. 4 1 0.6250 23. 50 1 0.6250 24. an 1 0.6250 25. by 1 0.6250 26. do 1 0.6250 27. du 1 0.6250 28. he 1 0.6250 29. in 1 0.6250 30. me 1 0.6250 31. no 1 0.6250 32. or 1 0.6250 33. discovered 1 0.6250 34. so 1 0.6250 35. greatest 1 0.6250 36. among 1 0.6250 37. boat 1 0.6250 38. game 1 0.6250 39. knew 1 0.6250 40. they 1 0.6250 41. then 1 0.6250 42. know 1 0.6250 43. busy 1 0.6250 44. bread 1 0.6250 45. missed 1 0.6250 46. childish 1 0.6250 47. rather 1 0.6250 48. toad 1 0.6250 49. toit 1 0.6250 50. emerging 1 0.6250 51. unless 1 0.6250 52. years 1 0.6250 53. other 1 0.6250 54. case 1 0.6250 55. described 1 0.6250 56. turn 1 0.6250 57. twit 1 0.6250 58. convince 1 0.6250 59. follow 1 0.6250 60. everyone 1 0.6250 61. long 1 0.6250 62. steph 1 0.6250 63. stick 1 0.6250 64. because 1 0.6250 65. mean 1 0.6250 66. words 1 0.6250 67. overrated 1 0.6250 68. about 1 0.6250 69. fullbacks 1 0.6250 70. problem 1 0.6250 71. rugby 1 0.6250 72. fossil 1 0.6250 73. more 1 0.6250 74. most 1 0.6250 75. idea 1 0.6250 76. don't 1 0.6250 77. perhaps 1 0.6250 78. eben 1 0.6250 79. into 1 0.6250 80. 2013 1 0.6250 81. ago 1 0.6250 82. but 1 0.6250 83. cap 1 0.6250 84. semantics 1 0.6250 85. day 1 0.6250 86. spiteful 1 0.6250 87. reinvented 1 0.6250 88. i'm 1 0.6250 89. tosser 1 0.6250 90. goods 1 0.6250 91. him 1 0.6250 92. moffie 1 0.6250 93. those 1 0.6250 94. pompous 1 0.6250 95. may 1 0.6250 96. new 1 0.6250 97. now 1 0.6250 98. what 1 0.6250 99. when 1 0.6250 100. noob 1 0.6250 101. with 1 0.6250 102. say 1 0.6250 103. wordplay 1 0.6250 104. useless 1 0.6250 105. sliced 1 0.6250 106. said 1 0.6250 107. try 1 0.6250 108. who 1 0.6250 109. which 1 0.6250 110. while 1 0.6250 111. self 1 0.6250 112. yet 1 0.6250 113. pieter 1 0.6250 114. important 1 0.6250 115. donkey 1 0.6250 116. who's 1 0.6250 117. recently 1 0.6250 118. etzebeth 1 0.6250 119. just 1 0.6250 120. since 1 0.6250 121. people