ed-grimley
Bench
- Messages
- 2,552
The 2017 match will be the last.
Draw your own conclusions.
Draw your own conclusions.
ECT - the fixture IS pointless
If it was a genuine trial game as it was designed to be, then it would be good keeping it - but it became a laughing stock because of the way it was run
Players who were never a chance of an Origin berth playing "representative" football
What were they representing? The "no hopers"?
The NRL has said that it intends to take more NRL games to regional centres to replace City v Country
If they do that (and I'm not sure they actually will) it will be a good thing for Rugby League outside of Sydney
Well done. You've just summed up the two greatest fallacies in the game.
Firstly, if you think it's pointless you have no idea what you're on about and just proves my point.
Secondly, that there is some kind of plan to replace City-Country with something else that will benefit bush footy. Because there isn't.
What the f**k kind of question is that? Are you serious? Okay, I'll adopt this logic and pose the opposite question, what did more for Tamworth, hosting City-Country or Bathurst hosting an NRL game?What do think did more for Bathurst. Hosting an NRL game or a City v Country game in Tamworth?
Well done. You've just summed up the two greatest fallacies in the game.
Firstly, if you think it's pointless you have no idea what you're on about and just proves my point.
Secondly, that there is some kind of plan to replace City-Country with something else that will benefit bush footy. Because there isn't.
Why doesn't Qld do City/Country?
I'll tell you what the NSWRL plan is. They think they're going to "replace" City-Country with state cup games and maybe even state cup teams in country areas. It's basically Richo's ridiculous blueprint that has already been binned and saw him shown the door at the NRL. That's their brilliant plan. And even if it was a good plan, and it isn't, it hasn't even been organised, but they're still scrapping City-Country before they put anything else in place. It's rugby league administration in a nutshell.OK, so what was the point of the last 5 City v Country games?
Were they trial matches for Origin? No. Not even close.
Were they a thank you for Country Rugby League? Yes
Would Rugby League in the Country be better off replacing 1 x City v Country game a season with 3 or 4 NRL games at different venues? Yes. If there is a genuine plan to replace City v Country with meaningful NRL games then I'm all for it
If there isn't any such plan, then taking the City v Country fixture off the calendar is poor form
Guys, haven't you learnt by now? If you don't agree with ECT then you're wrong and have no idea what you're talking about by default.
That in itself makes arguing with him......pointless.
If it's upsetting the unopposed biggest f**kwit on this forum in East Coast Tiger then I say it's a job very well done by the NRL.
I'll tell you what the NSWRL plan is. They think they're going to "replace" City-Country with state cup games and maybe even state cup teams in country areas. It's basically Richo's ridiculous blueprint that has already been binned and saw him shown the door at the NRL. That's their brilliant plan. And even if it was a good plan, and it isn't, it hasn't even been organised, but they're still scrapping City-Country before they put anything else in place. It's rugby league administration in a nutshell.
That's the NSWRL plan. I don't think the NRL has one at all. I'm not sure which is worse.I get the feeling Baldrick and his "cunning plans" has been reincarnated and employed by the NRL
What the f**k kind of question is that? Are you serious? Okay, I'll adopt this logic and pose the opposite question, what did more for Tamworth, hosting City-Country or Bathurst hosting an NRL game?
I mean, really, some of the arguments people come up with. Fmd.