A NRL Union Team

[Pigskin]

sorry I have only skimmed this thread .....

but if the original team suggested played the wallabies, the leaguies would never win a scrum or line-out

but in all other aspects of play they'd make a mess of the rah rah boys

Oink !

 

[SpaceMonkey]

sorry I have only skimmed this thread .....

but if the original team suggested played the wallabies, the leaguies would never win a scrum or line-out

but in all other aspects of play they'd make a mess of the rah rah boys

Oink !

They'd get murdered in the tacked ball situation too. They'd either cop penalties for not releasing or they'd turn over a mountain of possession.
Basically the league guys would be superior as long as they were beating tacklers, but as soon as they were effectively tackled they'd be in trouble.

 

[Pigskin]

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.

i agree

thats quite a humourous thought really :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

a couple of guys from left field .... Shane Tronc from the Cowboys and Justin Tsoulos from the Eels would at least have the height for lineouts

Oink !

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Logan Swann would proably make an ok lock, at 195cm and around 100kg he's got the right physique for a jumper (although still not that tall).

 

[Pigskin]

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

i gotta agree having seen a little of that Rathbone .... he is lightning quick ..... would be almost identical to Brent Tate but faster ..... he'd probly be my pick for the fastest in either code atm (excluding lower graders like Jovan Clarke)

Oink !

 

[Tighthead]

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

I doubt it. Fans of one code who criticise the other keep forgetting that they are differenct came. True, they come from a common background, and have some common features, but they are very different sports.

 

[The Observer]

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

Yes, I've posted them before. Wanna read them?

 

[Tighthead]

That would be good - please do.

 

[The Observer]

OK. This could be long, so I'll break it up into little posts. Pleas keep an open mind ;-)

In 2002 in New Zealand, a Nine-a-side Rugby game was staged between an All Black legends team led by former Manu Samoa halfback Tu Nu'uali'itia and a Kiwi legends team featuring former Kiwi/Tonga hooker Duane Mann. The game was a hybrid of Rugby League and Rugby Union. It started with four tackles/play the balls, guaranteeing the attacking team four possessions (if they held onto the ball for that long without turning it over through error), before switching over to rucks and mauls. The format reportedly worked quite well in allowing both teams to play on even terms, and even though the players had retired from professional Rugby, it was certainly the most successful cross code fixture as a contest (moreso than Wigan/Bath or Saints/Sale).

These are the additional rules I'd suggest:

• Number of players – nine players per starting team, 4 interchange players. Both codes have nine-a-side Rugby. Nines RL improved upon Sevens RL in that gameplay retained more elements of the structure and tactics of the full 13 man game, whereas it still offered the attractive element of the short game (e.g. SL World Nines). Similarly, nine-a-side Hybrid Rugby could better retain the structural elements of 15 RU than 7s.
• Tackle/Phase Count – 4 RL tackles/play-the-balls then rucks &/or mauls. This allows attacking team a set time in possession (RL) before allowing contest at every breakdown (RU).
• Tackling – charges using the point of the shoulder should be allowed (unlike in RU), as in RL, but use of the forearm in charging down kicks/playing at the kicker (as in RL) should be strictly penalised – use of outstretched hands only. This would encourage and reward tough defence but still keep it clean.

 

[The Observer]

• Time – 80 minutes two halves of 40 minutes. A Nine-a-side game of 80 minutes duration could keep spectators interested, whereas 80 minute Sevens or half/half game may not be as compelling. Time outs for injuries so that each half runs for 40 minutes.
• Field markings - the field should be marked with a line every 10 metres as is done in RL. The line markings could be white with additional red lines (next to the white) at the 20m and 40m marks. In goal size should be 10m (unlike NRL's 8m). RU’s 22 metre line would be replaced, without fuss, by a 20m line.
• Points scoring system
- Tries – 5 points as in RU (to give the try the highest value of any points scoring method)
- Field/drop goals – 2 points to compromise between League and Union. Desire to encourage more try scoring than goal kicking.
- Conversions – 2 points as in both codes
- Penalty goals – 2 points as in RL. This would encourage teams to take other means to score points from penalties
• Taking a "mark" from a kick – players should be allowed to take the mark in their own in-goal area, as in RL. Taking the mark in one’s own 22 m zone should be eliminated. This would encourage the receiving team to commence attacking play immediately and encourage continuous play.
• NO direct kicks for touch inside 20m zone – to encourage players to run with the ball rather than kick away possession.

 

[The Observer]

• 40/20 kicks should be allowed as is the case in RL. This would encourage long tactical kicking and open up the field.
• Lineouts – if they are included, lifting should not be allowed because it would give the Union players a natural advantage, but jumping would allow both teams to compete. In 9s, lineouts would only be short anyway (3 people) + thrower.
• Scrums - 5 man scrums should be contested as in RU, because many RL supporters would actually enjoy watching RL players participate and compete well in a contested scrum. The referee should use the RU convention to start the scrums "lock, touch, pause, engage!" The playmaking half (RU 10, RL 7) could feed the scrum. The hooker in scrums could also act as the base-of-the-ruck-passer in general play
• Forcing the ball in-goal - allow a mix of the RL and RU rules. If an attacking player kicks the ball and the defender forces the ball in his own in-goal:

 

[The Observer]

- from outside the 20m zone, the defending team could take a drop out from underneath the goal posts. This would reward astute, accurate long range kicking and coordinated, disciplined kick chase, and encourage defending teams to return kicks from the in-goal, which often produces exciting play in RL.

- from inside the 20m zone, the defending team should be allowed to take a 20m restart. This would encourage teams to use options other than the “last tackle” short/”grubber” kicks into a goal zone that are so prevalent in RL (for which RL is often criticised). A form of this rule was trialled by the NRL before the 2002 season (but from inside the 40m zone), and is similar to RU rules.

• 20m restart - mix RL/RU rules. Allow option of a PTB or a drop out. Should not allow for punt kick to touch (as is the case in RL where you can punt the ball and find touch to get a scrum feed).
• When receiving a penalty - option to set a scrum on the spot, as in RU, and thus allow the option of more set plays and scrum moves, even in Nine-a-side.
• Benefit of the doubt - to attacking team when contentious tries are adjudicated. This would reward positive attacking play.
• Video referee should show the results of try decisions on the big screen to inform the spectators of decisions, as in RL. This would provide more interest and excitement to the spectator.
• Penalties - a defender should NOT be penalised or sin binned for knocking down an attacking player's pass. It will be unnecessary to penalise spoiling of attacking raids in a format where there will be many more opportunities to score tries (with the ball being spread and used by the team) than before.[/b]

 

[The Observer]

• Joint judiciary tribunal - equal representation of League and Union representatives to make decisions on citations of foul play. Using something similar to NRL's points grading system. Perhaps it could use coaches/officials/administrators with experience in both codes of Rugby (eg England RU Sevens coach and former RFL technical director Joe Lydon?)
• Cards - yellow for sin-bin (10 minutes), red for send off, as used in both codes of Rugby.
• Interchange - the 12/4 rule should operate as in RL. 12 substitutions can be made over the course of the match - including substitutions for blood bins and concussions UNLESS those substitutions are made when a player is placed on report for foul play. 4 replacement players would be allowed, and this would be monitored by an interchange manager holding up cards when the change is made. Substitutions could be made for injury, rest and tactical reasons, giving coaches flexibility in how they use their team, but without heading to the unlimited substitutions made in American football.
• Game ball - a Gilbert four panelled Rugby ball should be used as is done in RU (ZP/S12) and was used in SL in Aus. The Steeden is crap.
• Golden Point rule would allow extra time to increase interest and excitement. If the scores a level at extra time, 2 periods of 5 minutes of extra time should be allowed. If during either period a point is scored the game would finish. If no points are scored at the conclusion of the 2nd 5 minute period, the match would remain a draw. Teams would be allowed 2 extra interchange players. This would inject a gripping finish to the match.

Commentators who genuinely respect and even enjoy both games should be used.

 

[aqua_duck]

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

i gotta agree having seen a little of that Rathbone .... he is lightning quick ..... would be almost identical to Brent Tate but faster ..... he'd probly be my pick for the fastest in either code atm (excluding lower graders like Jovan Clarke)

Oink !

Rathbone is quick but there's no way he'd match guys like Rupeni Caucaunibuca, Doug Howlett, Breyten Paulse or Joe Rocokoco, to be honest I think Mark Gerrard is a more complete player than Rathbone.

 

[super_coach]

although iam a mad league man--i think in a one off game the rugby boys would win easy--the scrums the lineouts are so techincal--but give the top league boys a year or so in union--it would be a different matter-greater skill,bigger faster units.when you consider the impact of rodgers etc in rugby-i woild hate to think what johns ,wing and a few of the big back rowers would do---Anyway its not going to happen--theirs room for both codes-but give me the week in and week out of leagues passion

 

[CanadianSteve]

I wrote this in an earlier thread called 'Who could switch codes successfully':

think what comes out of this is that in New Zealand, the better players are playing union for the most part - so that more All Blacks could help the Kiwis/Warriors than vice-versa. This would seem to make sense since union is the national game there.

Whereas in Australia it would probably be argued, by league fans especially, that the NRL players as a group are better and tougher than the union players (aside from the positions which don't convert easily.)

In England I would also think the union players as a group are ahead of the league players. Or at least there doesn't seem to be much call to recruit league players other than Jason Robinson. Henry Paul made the switch but couldn't get into the England first team.

So the conclusion is that Aus is the only country where league is stronger than union. Any comments?

When I think more about this, is Australian league really that much stronger than Australian union? After all, the Wallabies do very well against the other top RU nations.

 

[The Observer]

CanadianSteve, even though the Wallabies do easonably well in RU< Aussie RL has much more strength in depth in world class players for a variety of reasons, not simply because it has 14 FT professional franchises from which to choose players (vs 3 in RU).

To you, Tighthead and others, What do you think of the rules suggestion for a hybrid Rugby game? I would add that the Union team should not include any tight forwards or open side flankers - only blindsides and number eights, in order to allow the league team to compete in the set pieces.

 

[Kurt Angle]

The only reason the Wallabies fare well against other nations is because worldwide, the culture of RU lacks professionalism and pursuit of excellence.

In other words, the ARU is 2nd rate, and is the bar for all other union, hence they are 2nd rate and mediocre.

RL is a sport Australia actually cares about. We pursue this with more vigour than cricket, swimming, cycling, hockey,

i.e other sports we are good at.

England and NZ RL players are actually fantastic athletes. But if the world struggles to compete with us at swimming, cricket, et al... they have buckleys of catching up to us at RL.

 

[Tighthead]

The only reason the Wallabies fare well against other nations is because worldwide, the culture of RU lacks professionalism and pursuit of excellence.

In other words, the ARU is 2nd rate, and is the bar for all other union, hence they are 2nd rate and mediocre.

RL is a sport Australia actually cares about. We pursue this with more vigour than cricket, swimming, cycling, hockey,

i.e other sports we are good at.

England and NZ RL players are actually fantastic athletes. But if the world struggles to compete with us at swimming, cricket, et al... they have buckleys of catching up to us at RL.

Absolute rubbish.

To you, Tighthead and others, What do you think of the rules suggestion for a hybrid Rugby game? I would add that the Union team should not include any tight forwards or open side flankers - only blindsides and number eights, in order to allow the league team to compete in the set pieces.

The rules are interesting, but I think that 9 players is far to few to be playing an 80min game on the field - it would resemble 7's too much, as there would rarely be an authentic contest for posession at the breakdown. The reason RL teams have been quite successful at RU 7s in the UK is because RU7s is probably closer to RL than RU 15s - with so few players on the field, there are few bona fide contests at the breakdown, as neither team wants to commit players that may be needed in defese - there is almost a de facto play the ball - especially when the tackled player is on the ground.

Joker - going by your rules, it is unlikely that a RU prop would get picked, due to the number of players and sacrafice of the set piece. However, it would be an ideal game for open side flankers.

 

[Kurt Angle]

Not Rubbish at all.

RU is not much more than a hobby masquerading as a sport in Australia.

Yet these full-time hobbyists are able to make 3 out of the last 4 world cups, and win two of them.

It's like beating William Hung(she bang) at Karaoke. It doesn't mean you are any good, it's just he sucks.

The situation is reversed with RL. Australia is a great sporting nation, but there are only 3 sports that Australian maintains over 150 fulltime athletes in domestic competition.

RL, Cricket and AFL.

Those are our main sports.

If our secondary sports are world beaters, it's only logical our primary sports are a step above that.

To claim RL is in a parlous state because Australia thrashes everyone is not a discredit to the sport, its just a reflection on the strength of Australian RL.

If both codes combined, with RI inheriting the professional culture and talent RL has, RU would then too become nothing more than Australia beating everyone else by 60 points.

But this competition makes the Wallabies viable.

In fact the Wallabies are nothing more than Clayton's Kangaroos (The Kangaroos you have when you don't have Kangaroos)