What i found difficult was the edict that it went on players whole careers.
There we're some players (Dennis Betts for example who had possibly one of the most decorated careers ever) shouldve been one of the first players picked on that principle, yet his performances here was such a let down and disappointment i just didnt have it in me to select him.
The more variables the better. We are all after the same core group of players, so the teams have all ended very similar. The ability to add in unknowns adds excitement rather than working down a list from best to worst players.
Picking a player like Sonny Fai or Ben Henry is a guess at their future and what could have been;
A current player like Maumalo
or Fusitua you can argue they are disadvantaged in not yet reaching the peek of their career yet;
A player like Bully, Foran, etc you can argue their talents was better than their Warriors form suggests.
A player who came at the end of their careers like Blair
, Mann, etc get unfairly discounted if only their Warriors form is included
Then there are the players with variable form in different season for the Warriors - Mateo, Inu, even Manu - how do you factor that in.
Players where a weakness in one area affects our individual perception of a player - I regard Mannering as a good player but not in the legendary standing that others see. Personal opinion.
It’s all subjective and that’s the fun of it!