Is Jonah Lomu overrated?

No....

First of all Jonah Lomu was an amazing rugby player and is one of the main reasons that the sport turned professional, he may have had his flaws (every player does) but he was an exciting and entertaining player amd used his skills and strengths to dominate the game. Your question doesn't really make sense. Your saying that he was only a great rugby player because the sport was unprofessional or semiprofessional so therefore the opponents he played against were not up to the quality that they are now? Which I agree is true, but Lomu was also an unprofessional sportsman so was in exactly the same boat, he never had any advantage over the rest of the players. If Spies, Burger etc were to have been born 20 years earlier they would still be great players of their time but not up to the quality they are now, just the same as Lomu would be a much better player if he were to come on to the scene now. Also don't get me started on comparing a loose forward to a winger

What a ridiculous premise.

OK -- let's do some (objective) analysis. Lomu was 260 lbs of pure muscle, yet he had the acceleration and pace to play effectively on the wing. In fact he had the acceleration and pace to be dominant on the wing.

Now look at any other winger. Can you think of any player with Lomu's size and strength who could play on the wing, before, during or after Lomu's career. I can't, and I don't think anyone else can either.

And your Springbok comarisons are less than apt. Spies and Burger are both smaller than Lomu, and loose forwards as well. Neither has anything close to Lomu's acceleration -- if they did they would be on the wing too. Botha is the same size, but he's a second rower. If he had speed, he wouldn't be in the second row.

Lomu was unique when he played. He would be unique today. Matter resolved.

Edit: Iago -- you truly are a fuzzy thinker. I asked you to name a single player -- past or present -- who had or have Lomu's combination of power and pace. You didn't because you can't. Spies, despite his odd appearence on the wing has neither -- certainly not the size as he's at least 20 lbs lighter than Lomu.

Its a simple question which you try to avoid because the answer is -- none. You have named some players who might have either the size or the pace, but none who have both. In short, you have nothing to offer but red herrings. Put up -- or shut up.

Edit: Lomu at 106 kg??!!. Thats about 225 lbs. When was Lomu ever that small when he played? When was he ever close? This is just getting stupid.

Yes, over rated in that he never really had the career he should have. Lomu only played a fraction of the tests he should have as he was a very sick man.

If Jonah had played for any normal length of time for the ABs, he would have had an untouchable record in terms of try scoring.

He was not a genetic freak just a big Tongan boy that went to a good rugby school in NZ, hundreds of similar young men now walking the streets of Australia playing Rugby League. Interesting to note that if Jonah had been healthy there is a very real possibility that he would probably have switched codes and gone to play league in Australia just like everyone else at that time.

Over rated? Yes, he never really reached his full potential due to serious illness but his name continues to overshadow the likes of Wilson, Cullen, Joe and Siti simply because . . . he was a big fast boy.

As for the African loose forward comparisons, WTF? Spies is a myth, past his use by date, the future of international loose forward dominance is in the hands of the next AB captian; Reid, and all little men around the world should fear the arrival of Victor Vito.

Lomu was a genetic freak.

He ran over forwards like they were children. I've seen the highlights, no rugby player has ever done that so many times on so many occasions.

You can bring out all the numbers you want, but replays speak for themselves.

Also Beast Mtawarira isn't that great, he was at the peak of his career during the 09 Lions tour and that was about it. He has yet to do that again. Don't even mention the Victor Matfield shirt drag - that's great athleticism by Victor, not the beast.

Until a rugby player can do what Jona could, he is not overrated.

Nah, those Bok players you mentioned are overrated. Botha is a thug and is only there to rough up the opposition, so too is Burger, although he is a little less obvious. I like Pierre Spies personally, I think he's a great no.8, but he is not as good as he was. Besides, you can't really compare them, they play totally different positions and have totally different jobs. Lomu might not look as good as he did back in amateur, but he'd still have the required effect on his opponents.

Spies is a hack, Botha just a cheap thug and Burger is handy but no star. None of them would be fit to tie Jonah's boots. Jonah would definitely be a legend compared to the inferior players you mentioned but in the modern era the focus is now more on defense and less on attacking flair so the room to run you had 15 years ago is not there today with stronger defensive structures. He wouldnt have the impact now he did then but he still would have a greater impact than most.

Also BLM, there was a guy just before Lomu burst on the scene. Went by the name of Tuigamala. He was the first of the monster wingers. One of the funniest things I have seen in rugby is when Campese tried to tackle him. He gave him a 20 metre piggyback before dotting the ball down.

You hve a poor argument.

You, must lack brain cells to think you would teleport a 20 year old Jonah to 2011 and get him to play against todays stars because thats what your question is implying.

Do you think Diego Maradona would be the player he was playing at the speed and power of professional football today?

Do you think Sir Donlad Bradman would be as dominanat as he was playing professionl cricket today?

Do you think Carl Lewis would be able to Dominate Usain Bolt or any top sprinter with todays average times over the 100m?

Do you think Mark Spitz would be able to get close to the World Record times that are set the fastest swimmers today?

Thats how pointess your question is. Youre comparing apples and oranges. Comparing 2 different times. Do you think playes in the amatuer era had access to diets, fitness programs, facilities, quality coaches as they do today. You must be kidding yourself.

Lomu was the FIRST superstar of rugby Union in a time where Rugby just turned professionalism. This sets him apart from others due to the timing of his rise.

He also REVOLUTIONISED the physical aspects of the game in terms of speed, size and power that lacked in the game during the period of transition from Amateur to professionalism. No other athlete had an impact on the game than Lomu. If it wasnt for Lomy, rugby would still be played by skinny, fat, slow men.

"Maradona, Pele were both great players competing against good players. Lomu was a good player competiting against mediocre players"

LOL. Like who? So are you suggesting Marc Spitz, Jesse Ownes, Carl Lewis, Sir Donald Bradman were good players among mediocre players?

I think your the one finding it difficult grasping onto a simple concept of difference.

In fairness he never really got to his prime because in my opinion if he played at the World Cup in 2003 (he would have been 28 which is about the time that wingers peak) New Zealand would have beaten England in the final and instead of Mike Catt being the unlucky trod on victim it would have been Jason Robinson who is 9 inches smaller than Lomu. It was unfortunate for Jonah that his liver went dodgy around 2002. Also I think he would not be trouble particularly much by Spies, Botha and Burger as these are all Bok forwards and he would be no match for Bryan Habana, JP Pietersen or any other winger apart from maybe Spies when he plays wing instead of Number 8.

I know this is meant as a wind up, but I'm going to answer anyway.

I think he tends to be talked about in platitudes when we speak of him now, so you could say that yes, he does tend to be overrated a bit. He struggled under high kicks, and his tackling technique, while effective, relied more on brute strength than finesse. Cory Jane and Richard Kahui are (technically at least) more wel rounded wingers.

However, to compare him to Spies, Botha and Burger is a bit dumb, none of them are wingers. And none of them approach him in physical size or speed (maybe Spies, but he still doesn't match Lomu), even with his disease holding him back.

Lomu was a devastating ball runner, he had a decent step, a great fend and the ability to stand in a tackle while 3 guys tried to bring him down. I don't think he'd be any different were he to come along today.

Let's put it in perspective, in 1995, when Lomu made all and sundry look like children, he is estimated (because of his kidney issues) to have been at about 60% of his peak condition.

60%, just over half.

Imagine Lomu in 95, now multiply by 2

The answer is truly scary.

EDIT:

Iago, I know it's not fair to treat you like someone who actually understands the game, but name us some athletes who are not current or recent Springboks.

Do you actually know any?

You are simply a child who likes the Boks, that's fine, but don't attempt to sound intelligent.

springboks fan i take it

noticing that u failed to credit any other athletes that dont play in a boks kit

I can list u severel great athletes:

Sean lamont

Max Evans

Richie Gray

Joe Ansbro

Nic De Luca

Chris patterson

Alistar Kellock

And yes im a scot

But calling these guys the only good rugby players in the world is as childish as u saying that and spring boks can be athletes

PS.

On ur list of super SA athletes where the hell is bryan habana

im not for SA but thats guy is a warrior, certainly better than schalk burger

LONG LIVE THE SCOTS!!!