A NRL Union Team

[MOON MAN]

Caucau would be the best winger in either code. He is simply awesome. Even though im Australian, I reckon given the training, that New zealand team proposed above would kill the aussie league team. Although I am a huge league fan, how is league a superior game?. It is played at a high level in three countries? It could be argued that Union is played in a high level in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, England, Argentina, Wales, Ireland, Italy, Scotland, France! So obviously the people in those countries outside Australia do not agree! Also how the f**k would an Australian league team beat an aussie union team at union. The technique involved in union is far superior to that of league. Rucking, mauling, line outs, proper scrums. Rugby union is a technique-based game which makes it far superior to league. League is a bash-type game, whilst involving skill, the technique needed in league pales into insignificance to that of union.

 

[anastabation]

Regardless of whether they could beat the wallabies in a game of union or not, your selections are very thought provoking and interesting. Especially with your hooker and flanker selections! Tallis and Hindmarsh would have an absolute BALL at break away, and riddle with his agression and build would be ideal for a hooker in union. Johns at 5/8th and Wing at half back... makes alot of sense given unions style. Wing has a great passing game and running game... he'd sure as hell shit on gregan! Obviously you put alot of thought into the selections and its apparent.

2 fat merkins at prop would do the trick.

*golf clap*

 

[Thomas]

Could you imagine Tallis at flanker.....now that'd be bloody scary!

 

[thuganomics]

Thats one HELL of a TEAM!!

 

[Edwahu]

Id name tough bastards like Morley, Wiki etc and try to bash them out of the game. Turning it into a war of attrition would be the only realistic way of winning a union game. Still get smashed (probably all as a result of pushover tries and penalty goals) but they would do some damage.

 

[Anonymous]

13: McCaw

LOL, what for, to drop the ball? McCaw should stick to being the "best player in the world" in Union because he is capable of bending over and picking up a ball, he would be a dreadful league player. No ball skills at all, terrible hands, no clue in open play.

5. Ben Kennedy
4. Jason Ryles

Too short. Ryles is what, 196cm? And Kennedy 190ish?? Kennedy could never play lock and Ryles is on the short side.

 

[Hazy]

Id name tough bastards like Morley, Wiki etc and try to bash them out of the game. Turning it into a war of attrition would be the only realistic way of winning a union game. Still get smashed (probably all as a result of pushover tries and penalty goals) but they would do some damage.

Morley would be an interesting pick, my bet is he would go to ground only once.

When he does get up he would be looking to start a blue in the next tackle and shortly thereafter be in the bin!!!

Now I hate to be a prick, but how long do you reckon this interesting and thought provoking discussion would last on a certain other website?

 

[SP]

Now I hate to be a prick, but how long do you reckon this interesting and thought provoking discussion would last on a certain other website?

not even a minute

 

[Anonymous]

But I'll bet that other site has less Garys.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

13: McCaw

LOL, what for, to drop the ball? McCaw should stick to being the "best player in the world" in Union because he is capable of bending over and picking up a ball, he would be a dreadful league player. No ball skills at all, terrible hands, no clue in open play.

He'd be there to tackle anything that moved, not so much as a ball player.

 

[JJ]

Silly thread really. The league team would get destroyed at union... Scrum time would result in serious injuries to the frontrowers, and quite frankly they wouldn't have a clue what do do at ruck and maul time (if you doubt that take a look at Brad Thorn's first year in union, he stood around watching with a startled look on his face most of the time. Finally, they wouldn't have a clue in the lineouts either.

The only positions league forwards could adapt to easily are blindside and no 8, lock is a bit more difficult due to lineouts.

Hookers in league are the natural halfs for union, but their passes are not strong enough.

I get a bit tired of the league union debate - here in NZ the rah rahs are always putting down league - and it seems that it's the opposite in Aust.

Bottom line is that in many respects the games are very diffferent. There are positions and players that can transfer well both ways - but you can't have a decent union team from rugby players because the tight forward play is so different. And rugby players would struggle with the up and back defence, defence in general, and their often limited offloading skills.

Personally, I find union tedious - but there are some very good players playing it. League for me is a much superior product, and given this is a league forum, I wonder why we're even talking about it!

 

[The Engineers Room]

Mason would be a good second rower.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Mason would be a good second rower.

Why? Because he's tall? He's also a fat lump of lard so there goes any lineout advantage he might have had, he's reasonably tall but he wouldn't be much of a jumper and his weight would mean he's not an ideal candidate for lifting. He'd add some weight to the scrum but that's about it.

 

[Raider_69]

Mason would be a good second rower.

he isnt a good league second rower, what will make him good at union!?

 

[Kurt Angle]

Well, for starters people, there is an easy way to league to counteract the Union scrum, don't have any.

This would be my team that walks out on the pitch to start.

15. Lockyer.
14. Minichello
13. Hodges
12. Barrett (Inside centre in Union is a league 5/8)
11. Tuquiri
10. Johns
9. Wing

8. Tallis
7. Ricketson
6. Hindmarsh
5. Matt Parsons (201cm)
4. Brad Thorn (if we get him back , he jumps for the All blacks, Lineout is not that difficult a skill, I played union for a year a did it myself. I was a league back)
3. Who cares.
2. Who cares.
1. Who cares.

16. Someone who can lineout throw really well
17. Webcke
18. Clinton
19-22. some good players.

In union, you have 3 legal scrummagers starting and 2 on the bench. To pack in the front row in union, you must be certified as someone who has been skilled in scrummaging. If you can not have 3 certified front rowers in a union scrum, you cannot compete.

All League would have to do if have to have the 3 starting front rowers tripping a 'ouch sir, I tripped and spained my ankle.'.

These 3 guys go off the pitch, and there are no more competitve scrums for the rest of the match.

For lineouts, well an 8 man lineout would be more difficult for the League side.

A 2 man lineout, a totally different case altogether. Have your 2 jumpers stand about 20 metres from touch. On a signal, the jumper closest to the sideline would sprint towards the sideline. As he has a break on the guy opposing him in the lineout, the lineout thrower would just give to him unopposed, as he has a gap.

The League side would have buckleys of winning the throw-ins from the Wallabys, but would win a fair amount of their own.

 

[Anonymous]

if you doubt that take a look at Brad Thorn's first year in union, he stood around watching with a startled look on his face most of the time

Which is why he made the All Black squad, despite never being a first choice player for Australia in league???

 

[russ13]

Why worry about lineouts?
Do what Bradford did in the Middlesex 7s & throw the ball in underarm. Let the opposition have the ball & smash them off the park. This is what Bradford did when they won the Tournament. In the final they didn't touch the ball for the first 7 mimutes (this is an eternity in union 7s) & then scored 6 trys.


Anyway it is apparent the the current union players in Australia would be just road kill in the selection process if the best rugby players were selected.

 

[Moffo]

Silly thread really. The league team would get destroyed at union... Scrum time would result in serious injuries to the frontrowers, and quite frankly they wouldn't have a clue what do do at ruck and maul time (if you doubt that take a look at Brad Thorn's first year in union, he stood around watching with a startled look on his face most of the time. Finally, they wouldn't have a clue in the lineouts either.

The only positions league forwards could adapt to easily are blindside and no 8, lock is a bit more difficult due to lineouts.

Hookers in league are the natural halfs for union, but their passes are not strong enough.

I get a bit tired of the league union debate - here in NZ the rah rahs are always putting down league - and it seems that it's the opposite in Aust.

Bottom line is that in many respects the games are very diffferent. There are positions and players that can transfer well both ways - but you can't have a decent union team from rugby players because the tight forward play is so different. And rugby players would struggle with the up and back defence, defence in general, and their often limited offloading skills.

Personally, I find union tedious - but there are some very good players playing it. League for me is a much superior product, and given this is a league forum, I wonder why we're even talking about it!

I personally hate this argument. Whats stopping league players from learning the rugby scrum tactics after a few games and practice sessions with scrum pros??

To suggest that they'd get crushed is poor IMO and reeks of eliteness. League players are in general fitter than union players and are hardly small units...the guys selected in many of these squads would be big enough to face up to union forwards

Lets stop with this silly line of thought

Cheers,
Moffo

 

[raiders_lover_18]

15. lockyer
14. tahu
13. tate
12. girdler
11. schifcofske (great idea sportsjock)
10. johns
9. wing
8. cinvoneciva
7. hindmarsh
6. monoghan
5. waterhouse
4. bailey
3. webke
2. riddell
1. davico

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Silly thread really. The league team would get destroyed at union... Scrum time would result in serious injuries to the frontrowers, and quite frankly they wouldn't have a clue what do do at ruck and maul time (if you doubt that take a look at Brad Thorn's first year in union, he stood around watching with a startled look on his face most of the time. Finally, they wouldn't have a clue in the lineouts either.

The only positions league forwards could adapt to easily are blindside and no 8, lock is a bit more difficult due to lineouts.

Hookers in league are the natural halfs for union, but their passes are not strong enough.

I get a bit tired of the league union debate - here in NZ the rah rahs are always putting down league - and it seems that it's the opposite in Aust.

Bottom line is that in many respects the games are very diffferent. There are positions and players that can transfer well both ways - but you can't have a decent union team from rugby players because the tight forward play is so different. And rugby players would struggle with the up and back defence, defence in general, and their often limited offloading skills.

Personally, I find union tedious - but there are some very good players playing it. League for me is a much superior product, and given this is a league forum, I wonder why we're even talking about it!

I personally hate this argument. Whats stopping league players from learning the rugby scrum tactics after a few games and practice sessions with scrum pros??

To suggest that they'd get crushed is poor IMO and reeks of eliteness. League players are in general fitter than union players and are hardly small units...the guys selected in many of these squads would be big enough to face up to union forwards

Lets stop with this silly line of thought

Cheers,
Moffo

Moffo, you may be right about many of the skills involved but the front row scrummaging techniques would still be a problem. It takes YEARS for a Union prop to develop as a scrummager to that level, it isn't something you could learn in months and requires a very specific body shape whyich most League forwards don't have. Unio props are basically built like powerlifters, they sacrifice mobility for strength the ability to withstand a huge amount of force in the scrum. Very few League props could potentially adapt. Webke or Paleaesina might have the right shape for it but they'd take a long time to get the technique down.