A NRL Union Team

[The Observer]

Great thread!

Kangaroo/Wallaby winger Wendell Sailor wrote a fascinating article in the weekend before last's Sunday Telegraph in which he picked the Rugby League players that could make up a Wallaby XV if they were playing Rugby Union. His XV was:

15 Lockyer; 14 C Walker, 13 S Berrigan, 12 M Gidley, 11 Tahu;
10 Johns 9 Gower 8. Tallis, 7. Menzies, 6. Kennedy; 5. Mason, 4. Civoniceva; 3. Webcke, 2. Buderus, 1. L Bailey.

 

[The Observer]

Given that there would be so much talent to choose from, Wendell's selection is pretty decent. There are some points I'd take up with him:
* Minichiello has become the complete player - he beats the first line of defence on kick returns, can step, pass and offload well, is incredibly strong for his size, a prolific tryscorer. Italian RU officials had an eye on him in the NRL GF 2003 before the RWC.

* Danny Buderus would have to play as a scrum half, there is no way he could play as an RU hooker. He's one of the best players in the NRL at clearing the ruck and getting the forwards moving. Gower is a good player and has played dummy half and first receiver for Australia, so I'd put him on the bench as cover for 9/10.

* Webcke may be 112 kg, and thus could have sufficient mass to play prop in RU, but I don't think he would have the right body shape and it wouldn't make the most of his abilities. He'd be a perfect number 8 in the Toutai Kefu mould - charges headlong at the defence, hits powerfully in defence, while not as skilful a ball player as Kefu, he has developed a passing/offloading game in the past two years.

* Similarly to Webcke, Bailey would be a better number 8.

* Finding NRL players with the right physique to potentially play front row in RU would be difficult - most players of that body shape don't make it to NRL level due to the athletic demands. However, the Brumbies signed two front rowers from RL - tight head Nic Henderson (Melbourne Storm RL) and hooker David Palavi (Storm/Canberra Raiders RL), so it is possible.

 

[The Observer]

The only players I can think of are:
* Warriors prop Mark Tookey - he's short and squat, with long RU training he might handle it.
* Dragons hooker Mark Riddell could play 2 in RU. He is large enough to alternate between hooker and second row this year in RL, and his main attribute is picking the ball up from dummy half, carrying it into contact and then driving forward. He actually raked for the ball in scrums last weekend too!
* Former Cowboy and QLD representative prop John Buttigieg was also big/fat enough to play RU prop.

* I heard once that Brad Fittler played RU for one year in Cambridge Park, Sydney in Under 15s when his RL team couldn't play, and that he blitzed it. Whether this is true or made up, he'd be brilliant as an RU 12 (inside centre/second five eighth).

* Hindmarsh, Kennedy, Wing, McLinden, Tahu have all played junior RU.

This would be my team:
15 Lockyer 14 Minichiello 13 Hodges 12 Fittler 11 Tahu 10 Johns 9 Buderus 8 Webcke 7 Civoniceva 6 Kennedy 5 Parsons 4 Mason 3 L Bailey 2 Mark Riddell 1 Tookey

16 Priddis/ Senter 17 Justin Tsoulos 18 Tyran Smith 19 N Hindmarsh/Tallis 20 Gower 21 Wing 22 McLinden/M Gidley

 

[The Observer]

BTW when you're over 190cm, what difference does a few more cm in height make to playing lock? Locks are lifted these days, its more about timing and placement and length of arm span than outright height and often the ball will be thrown in front rather than over the lifted player.

Its fair to say that any players would take a long time to adjust to the physical and fitness demands of RU, and that there is no guarantee that they'd make it. Comments about the front row would be right - RL players might need between 1-3 years to come to grips with scrumagging, if they ever could. They might also need to do what Brad Thorn did and do an apprenticeship in the NPC instead of Sydney/Bris club Rugby.

Finding someone to play a foraging/scavenging role (like openside flanker) might be tough to find one. Perhaps a player with a high tackling workrate and one who attempts to make one on one steals frequently might do it e.g. Kevin Campion? Someone like Civoniceva/Hindmarsh, who may have an RU background, Menzies who is athletic. I think they'd be spooked to see Holah, McCaw, Smith or Waugh standing over them ready to turnover the ball.

It'd be awesome to see a Kangaroo team play the Wallabies in a game of RU Sevens/Nines, or in a Hybrid game of RU/RL Sevens/Nines i.e takgin some rules from RL and some from RU. That would sell out Telstra Stadium, Suncorp or Canberra Stadium in a flash 8)

Imagine the clashes - Lockyer vs Rogers/Latham, Hodges against Mortlock, Buderus vs Gregan, Webcke vs Lyons, Freddy vs Giteau, Riddell vs Paul. Top.

 

[JJ]

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???

You know that selection was a joke - he wasn't even a first choice player for Canterbury. Presumably, Mitchell saw that in the long term Thorn would be useful, and he could be used in very short periods at the end of the game as an impact player (given his ball running) from the bench.

As for those who accused me of being elitist - that's rubbish, there are very skillful players in both games. But the skillsets are very different - backrowers (and front-rowers) could adapt relatively easily to no 8, blindside and to soem extent lock due to the ball carrying, defence and ball distribution involved there. But openside, with it's foraging work at the breakdown would take a lot of time to learn. As for the front row, it would take years to learn scrummaging, and some time to develop the body type - it's just different, I am not saying it's better. And lineouts are complex - Thorn for example is a very VERY ordinary lineout jumper - so don't think that it's easy.

By the same token very few tight forwards in union could succesfully swap to league - Garrick Morgan was a good example of someone who looked like he might be able to, but was an absolute failure - whereas in some cases loose forwards (Price, Gourley) have done very well while others (Koloto, Paramore) have been ok, and others (Brooke-Cowden, Roche) have failed.

Even in the backs where there have been great successes (Stuart, Ridge, O'Connor, Deveraux) there have been absolute failures (Gallagher).

In short there's no gurantee either way... and quite frankly I don't think Sailor, Thorn, and Tuquiri have exactly been runaway successes, while Rogers has been great, he's always hurt.

League is a better game - end of story

 

[Macca]

Here's an alternate side.

15. Lockyer
14. Walker A.
13. Slater
12. Gidley
11. Grothe
10. Johns
9. Drew
8. Bailey L.
7. Kennedy
6. Ricketson
5. Mason
4. Parsons
3. Nutley
2. Priddis
1. Webcke

 

[Thomas]

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.

But Russ, lineouts in 7's are very different from the lineouts in the 15 a side game. With more players on the pitch the union guys will just make sure that the RL players don't even get a touch. The Wallabies ahve two fine fetchers in Smith and Waugh, and the RL pack wouldn't even get the ball at the tackle.

It would be an interesting game nevertheless.

 

[Sportsjock]

I think everyone loses the point of my post.

I dont expect these guys to pull on the boots immediately and dominate in union. The backline certainly would.

But give the forwards 6 to 12 months of union training, you tell me that the ability of these NRL guys wouldnt be dominating in the world of rugby union.

Hows this idea then?!

Keep the current Wallaby forward pack, and insert the NRL backline I've named, and see what type of team you have then ;-)

 

[Tighthead]

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.

Are you saying that you don't think that players like Mortlock, Latham, Rathbone, Smith would be decent league players?

 

[Thomas]

I reckon Mortlock would be a dynamite league player, Rathbone as well.

I don't think the problem is that the players don't have the skills to be great in either code, its whether or not they could adapt and play well under pressure.

And Sportsjock....a team with the Wallaby forwards and Kangaroo backs would be dynamite, although hopefully the league players would learn not to run sideways and run away from their support...which is what Wendell and Robinson did in their first game..resulting in a turnover and a try to the opposition.

 

[miketyson]

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.

Are you saying that you don't think that players like Mortlock, Latham, Rathbone, Smith would be decent league players?

Larkham as he is injury prone already would last 3 weeks. He would have to make more tackles in 1 NRL game than all season playing union .

 

[Thomas]

Yes...but I think you'll find he said Latham, not Larkham...although what you said was very true about the "Fragile One".

 

[Moffo]

Fair enough Space mate, but league players are no shrinking violets when put up agianst union players either

Id still contend that several league players would make quality forwards after some initial training

Cheers,
Moffo

 

[Iafeta]

If a team of these players pulled on the boots and played Rugby Union for Australia - fair dinkum, they'd smash any team they'd run into.

They would certainly smash the current Australian union team, and is probably one reason why Union keep refusing to have an intercode game of league and union against each other.

This is a team I came up with - obviously much of it is subjective, but reality is, we could probably name two or three teams of league players with more skills than the current Australian union team.
The team I have come up with arent necessarily the best NRL players in their relevant positions in league, however , are named in this team with the style of union in mind and how well they would adapt.



15. Darren Lockyer
14. Timana Tahu
13. Matt Cooper
12. Mark Gasnier
11. Clinton Shcifkoske
10. Andrew Johns
9. Craig Wing
8. Trent Waterhouse
7. Nathan Hindmarsh
6. Gorden Tallis
5. Ben Kennedy
4. Jason Ryles
3. Joel Clinton
2. Mark Riddell
1. Shane Webcke


I won't even begin to get into an interchange bench, but you can just let your mind drift into same of the potential game breakers like Billy Slater you could have running into the game late.

Imagine the height and skills of Kennedy and Ryles in the second row and in the line outs?

Tallis and Waterhouse also adding height to the line out.
Hindmarsh playing the role of a Phil Waugh in breakaway.

And the backline skills speak for themselves...

I put Schifkoske on the wing simply for his general kicking skills and in union, at least one winger in your team need this.

Johns would be the goalkicker.

Can anyone here honestly say that this team wouldnt simply smash any current union team that the ARU can put on paper?

Gregan , Larkham v Johns , Wing - its a no brainer :lol:

I don't think this team would go that well. Union to league is a different game, that simple. While some of us Warrior fans drool occasionally over the thought of a Rococoko or Spencer switching codes, if the majority switched over I doubt they'd be successful. I recall a series in the UK where Wigan (RL) I think played Bath (RU). On both occasions, the team not used to the others game got an absolute caning.

You have Riddle as hooker - do we even know if he can loop a ball into a line out? Ryles and Kennedy as locks, I've never really seen them as such in league. Hindmarsh as a flanker? McCaw would be all over him. I doubt in league McCaw could be all over Hindmarsh, in union though I have no doubts. Brad Thorn has gone to union with some good success, but he isn't the All Blacks best lock. He doesn't have the line out game of a Chris Jack/Ali Williams/Keith Robinson. He doesn't have the clean out ability of a Simon Maling. He does a good job, no question, but he isn't the best in his position. Thats where the conversions get messy, in the forwards.

I'm pretty sure if this line up were to be in the Bledisloe Cup, the All Blacks would be absolutely celevating at the caning they would dish out.

 

[aqua_duck]

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 wouldn't see much game time in Union as he only tackles with shoulder charges and swinging arms, both of which are yellow card offences in Union.

Guys like Ryles and especially Kennedy would not win a single line out, they are simply too short, Kennedy is 188cm, Chris Jack is 202cm, thats 14cm he's conceeding and considerable line out experience to boot, I think Gidley would be an ideal inside centre in Union with his creativity, he is pretty much a 2nd 5/8th which is what inside centre is in union, cooper and gasnier would be good but they would both be outside centres, Clinton would not be that effective at prop too, he's more of a lock.

 

[Tighthead]

turning it into a war of attrition would be the only realistic way of winning a union game.

Against an experienced rugby union team, a war of attrition would be the worst possible tactic. They would simply out maul and out scrummage their inexperienced forward rivals - keeping it tight, and starving the talented league backs of posession. The leaguies would have to go for very quick ball at the breakdown, and pass it wide. This would be incredibly difficult against experienced opposition.

Rugby league and rugby union backs have the same basic skill set, despite the differences in the rules, and talented players can succeed in each code. However the technical differences in the forward pack make transfers pretty rare. It can be done, but only after a fairly long apprenticeship at lower levels.

 

[Edwahu]

That was my point, the idea is that if they are not going to get any ball they may as well pick guys who can do some damage without it. No use picking any attacking players if they are not going to get the ball.

Also, couldnt the league guys at least win those quick throw lineouts? Not sure of the rules on them though.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

That was my point, the idea is that if they are not going to get any ball they may as well pick guys who can do some damage without it. No use picking any attacking players if they are not going to get the ball.

Also, couldnt the league guys at least win those quick throw lineouts? Not sure of the rules on them though.

Not really an option if you don't have the ball in the first place, as the Union side would simply not bother kicking the ball out, theyd just grind it up the middle all day and recycle posession. On the odd occaision where the League side kicked for touch the union side would have the choice of lineout type and they'd go for the full lineout.

 

[CanadianSteve]

Can someone come up with a hybrid set of rules that would be fair to both sides in a cross-code game?

 

[CanadianSteve]

*edit* Sorry posted twice