Anybody who rates todays test an equal of SOO is a tripper!

[yakstorm]

It will take more then one scrappy test match for me to even consider raising test football above Origin.


Face the facts.....at this point Origin is so far ahead of test football its not funny. Suggesting otherwise is to have your head stuck in the sand.

No one is suggesting that International football is above Origin in terms of consistency of high performance matches all they are saying is that TODAY's match rates up there as a good game of football, which could be compared to being on the same level as SOME origin matches.

Its like how many said the ANZAC clash between Roosters and Dragons was up around Origin standard this year. Everyone knows Origin is better than NRL, especially in terms of consistency, but that was one of those games where there was a tight contest with plenty of passion and skill shown.

 

[Dr Crane]

My god mullup, you ARE a dickhead.

 

[dimitri]

I'd rather watch to nations who have fought arm in arm with each other in the past than a state with an inferiority complex duking it out with a state with a superiority complex.

i agree

great stuff

 

[OVP]

Mullup has been smoking too many cones.

But i can understand your love for Origin since you are a Qlder. Thats ALL that matters to you isnt it ? Beating the superior state ? Us NSWelshmen dont give a rats arse about origin ... its only a hick state we are playing after all. Bring on the bigger fish !! Go the internationals !! :lol: you stupid hick

 

[gaterooze]

Yesterday's match was as good as most Origins I've seen. No doubt (and no, I'm neither a Pom nor a Kiwi).

And I think the Tri Series has the *potential* to be just as great an event as SOO each year.

We'll see in six weeks how this year's series matches up.

 

[dimitri]

better than most origins ive seen too

 

[sunny]

pfft what a load of crap. That test was no where near the standard of origin....the kiwis had to cheat by providing a small field even to just draw, how sad. Also, how come any time any intl rl match is remotely exciting, close, or skilful, or even something vaguely resembling a game of football, the same ol' people always come out and say 'THIS IS THE REBIRTH OF INTL RUGBY LEAGUE IT IS GOING TO TAKE OVER INTL UNION, STATE OF ORIGIN blah blah blah'......if it is so good, shouldn't we get good games and contest all the time?

 

[dimitri]

cheat? it didnt break any international rule!

we do get good games most the time

last year in auckland was a great test

the ashes tour was also excellent

 

[sunny]

Doesn't the lack of a rule about something as basic as the size of the field indicate that somebody has to get their shit together?

 

[dimitri]

there is a rule

but they didnt break it

due to different sized stadiuums

some fields need to be smaller than others


they did not break any international rule


----------------------------------------------------

lets all move on

 

[sunny]

You are probably factually correct dimitri, but I think this a classic example of whats wrong with intl rl (well one of the many things wrong with it anyway). There should be an iron clad rule- the field must be (insert amount) long by (insert amount) wide and the in goals must be (insert amount) in size. If a stadium isn't big enough then it shouldn't be allowed to host a game. Things in intl league must be made to aspire up to certain standards, rather than having the standards pander to them and their incompetencies. Can't find a decent fullback, NZ? Don't worry, you can pick Brent Webb, even though he's from Cairns. Not good enough to make the Australian team, Johnny So and so? Don't worry, your great grandmother was from (insert crap country here) you can play for them. If intl rl wants to survive and earn a bit of respect, it has to encourage excellence rather than mediocrity, and be realistic rather than idealistic. Shit like this- the field size issue, selection stupidities, OH MY GOD AUSTRALIA DIDNT WIN BY 1000-0, INTL LEAGUE IS BACK!- only encourages mediocrity, which in the end I feel can only lead to a death sentence for what was once a decent intl game of good standard.

 

[dimitri]

thats where you are wrong

although i agree with you about the need for strong rules and an rlif with power over everyone

nearly every sport has a residency rule

there was no 'bending'

there is no 'great grandparent rule'

look at scotland rugby yawnyawn

the entire team are aussies and kiwis who have lived in scotland for a couple of years

 

[yakstorm]

According to the International Laws 2004 of Rugby League as published by the Australian Rugby League and approved by the International Federation:

The ingoals must be between 6 meters and 11 meters long with the prefered standard being 8 meters. The NZRL didn't break this law, they just went for the minimum of 6 meters.

The width of the field must be between 60 - 75 meters, with the prefered standard being of 68 meters, so again the NZRL didn't break the law, just took advantage of it.

To be honest it is a bit funny the ARL making a big deal of it, after all they are well known for increasing the width of the field and in goals when NZ travel over so they can outpace them.

 

[sunny]

I don't follow union much, but if that is the case, scotland union is a joke. Intl sport should be about where you are from, not where your parents/grandparents/deaf third uncle with three fingers are from or where you live or ply your trade in the club arena.

 

[dimitri]

According to the International Laws 2004 of Rugby League as published by the Australian Rugby League and approved by the International Federation:

The ingoals must be between 6 meters and 11 meters long with the prefered standard being 8 meters. The NZRL didn't break this law, they just went for the minimum of 6 meters.

The width of the field must be between 60 - 75 meters, with the prefered standard being of 68 meters, so again the NZRL didn't break the law, just took advantage of it.

To be honest it is a bit funny the ARL making a big deal of it, after all they are well known for increasing the width of the field and in goals when NZ travel over so they can outpace them.

exactly

 

[gaterooze]

if it is so good, shouldn't we get good games and contest all the time?

Well, look at the last six test matches we've played against NZ & England...

Against NZ, we lost one, won one, and drew the third. Good contest.

Against England, all three games were decided by 2-6 points. Good contest, and all three were INCREDIBLE games.

Sounds pretty good to me.

 

[dimitri]

cant agree more

 

[Copa]

It was a great game..... the tri-nations concept does havethe potential to equal SOO. I guess only time will tell.

 

[strong_latte]

Actually to be honest I thought the Ashes series against the poms was of a much higher standard than most origin series I've seen over the past few years... But I actually went to the effort of getting up to watch it... I'm guessing most of you people who keep arguing nothing is better than SOO didn't make that effort. The poms didn't have the bottle to beat us in all three tests, but they really took it to us never the less, and it took the superior experience and leadership of the roos to pull ahead in all 3 clashes in the last 5 mins, every encourter was thrilling till the end! Only origin match 2 this year was equel to that in my opinion.

 

[Copa]

The international opposition needs to improve (has started to happen) and we need to be retrained to watch international RL again.... it has beeen soooooo long since international RL loomed large in the minds of Aussies that it seems quite a shock to watch an international AND watch the game with fire in the blood... it's usually just "oh an international... we'll win...again".