Can international RL ever be really competitive?

[Polynesian Warrior]

I think the very nature of the code makes even competition a very hard phenomenon for RL to get used to.

Even the slightest advantage in fitness and skill levels equates into a massive scoreline against.

RL's an invasion sport with territory and possession equalling points. Once a side gets on a role they're more likely than not to massacre their opponents.

I've always said it, this is the major technical advantage union has over league. More matches are closer towards the end of union games than league games as its harder to score tries in union (more players on field, no offside gap to impede defences, ball in play less, more penalties awarded, higher tally for penalty goals).

Off course more games in rugby are getting closer because of what you said . :lol:
I heard that Japan just loss to the All Blacks and Israel beat England because there were too many players on the field , ball play less and more penalties .
I also heard that the Bledisloe Cup in Sydney will only have 10,000 fans watching because of too many penalties .

 

[yakstorm]

To be competitive these talented youngsters need to play professionally, otherwise theyll fall behind there counterparts. Say France gets 1 or 2 ESL clubs the depth just won't be there to be competive in 5 years, theyll be competing with countries with much greater player bases. I really don't believe they could catch up so much in 5 years its really just being wildy optimistic if not delusional. Taking talented youngsters from French RU i dont think will help, the money on offer at French RU clubs is huge, so after the top 16 clubs have filled there squad they then have to compete with the 2nd division clubs what talent that they can get will not compete with the national teams of GB, Aus or NZ.

I think here we might be looking at different levels of competitive. I do also doubt in five years France could beat the likes of Australia, however I have no doubt they would give them a bloody good run for their money.

Of course depth will always be a problem for any nation which doesn't have its own full time competition, you only have to look at NZ, which has been struggling with injuries up till possibly last year was the first time they had the depth to cover most of their positions were they lost players due to injuries and so on.

My view is if France has shown in the past 3 years consecutively that they can play against NZ and Australia for 70 minutes whilst they are part-time pro, they are only going to improve when they go full time. Both times France has played NZ, NZ has had only had a small handful of changes compared to their available full strength team, and Australia much the same.

Any Kangaroos side with Lockyer in it, is always going to be quite strong.

That said I can see your points, I'm just looking as 'the glass is half full'...I'm not at dillusional yet

 

[gladiator]

I think a team of inferior atheletes can keep the score line closer in a game of union than in league. Argentina are proof of that.
Some tall timber for the line outs, bulk in the scrums, ruck and maul skills, spoiling and time wasting tactics, the use of a good kicker and they run most of the top nations pretty close. With out having much in the way of quality atheletes, compared to OZ, NZ etc.

 

[screeny]

Oh dear PW, using individual scores to prove a point? How weak. GB beat Aus 24-12, their record home victory against the Kangaroos, Morocco drew with Serbia, Serbia's first ever result in a full int'l. Those individual results don't prove anything.

Try hard now......tell me, do you think RU having the ball in play LESS, having MORE players on the field, having MORE penalties awarded, and having MORE POINTS for a penalty gola than league makes union more or less likely than league to have closer games.

You guys are nuts! You turn everything into union v league!!! My point was that union has an advantage over league in this area as the nature of its gameplay coupled with its scoring means more of a chance of a closer score.

If the ball is in play twice as much in RL as in union, it's the same as saying a scoreline in a full game of union is comparable to a league score at HT.

 

[iggy plop]

I think the very nature of the code makes even competition a very hard phenomenon for RL to get used to.

Even the slightest advantage in fitness and skill levels equates into a massive scoreline against.

RL's an invasion sport with territory and possession equalling points. Once a side gets on a role they're more likely than not to massacre their opponents.

I've always said it, this is the major technical advantage union has over league. More matches are closer towards the end of union games than league games as its harder to score tries in union (more players on field, no offside gap to impede defences, ball in play less, more penalties awarded, higher tally for penalty goals).

Off course more games in rugby are getting closer because of what you said . :lol:
I heard that Japan just loss to the All Blacks and Israel beat England because there were too many players on the field , ball play less and more penalties .
I also heard that the Bledisloe Cup in Sydney will only have 10,000 fans watching because of too many penalties .

No you've got it wrong Pen. It's 10,000 combined for three full rounds of Sydney club yawnion.

Too many penalties.

 

[Moffo]

Well the Scots have just increased their playing roster with the Hull team signing a scottish RU international (Jonathon Steel)

 

[carlnz]

+
thats great news for scotland rugby league

 

[Polynesian Warrior]

To be competitive these talented youngsters need to play professionally, otherwise theyll fall behind there counterparts. Say France gets 1 or 2 ESL clubs the depth just won't be there to be competive in 5 years, theyll be competing with countries with much greater player bases. I really don't believe they could catch up so much in 5 years its really just being wildy optimistic if not delusional. Taking talented youngsters from French RU i dont think will help, the money on offer at French RU clubs is huge, so after the top 16 clubs have filled there squad they then have to compete with the 2nd division clubs what talent that they can get will not compete with the national teams of GB, Aus or NZ.

I think here we might be looking at different levels of competitive. I do also doubt in five years France could beat the likes of Australia, however I have no doubt they would give them a bloody good run for their money.

Of course depth will always be a problem for any nation which doesn't have its own full time competition, you only have to look at NZ, which has been struggling with injuries up till possibly last year was the first time they had the depth to cover most of their positions were they lost players due to injuries and so on.

My view is if France has shown in the past 3 years consecutively that they can play against NZ and Australia for 70 minutes whilst they are part-time pro, they are only going to improve when they go full time. Both times France has played NZ, NZ has had only had a small handful of changes compared to their available full strength team, and Australia much the same.

Any Kangaroos side with Lockyer in it, is always going to be quite strong.

That said I can see your points, I'm just looking as 'the glass is half full'...I'm not at dillusional yet

Your'e also forgot to mention that you can't just play matches at home and try to pull the biggest upset in league history .
GB have been trying to beat the Kangaroo's in England for the last 15 years and Im sick of watching the Kangaroo's vs GB on TV instead of playing in OZ .
The POM's thought they were good enough to compete against OZ in England so they made a one off tour to Sydney .
And thats where the gap is at the moments .
France might compete against OZ and Kiwi's in France but I can see them getting thrash by 80 points in Sydney or Auckland .
France and GB have got to tour downunder every two years to stay close to NZ and OZ .
To me Australia rank and NZ second because, its not fair that NZ have to tour Europe and play GB in their backyard .
But GB and France won't make the effort . NZ playing the Kangaroo's in NZ and OZ have help NZ big time .
Thats why NZ have beaten or push GB all the way in England because of the experience of playing OZ away from home .

 

[Polynesian Warrior]

I think the very nature of the code makes even competition a very hard phenomenon for RL to get used to.

Even the slightest advantage in fitness and skill levels equates into a massive scoreline against.

RL's an invasion sport with territory and possession equalling points. Once a side gets on a role they're more likely than not to massacre their opponents.

I've always said it, this is the major technical advantage union has over league. More matches are closer towards the end of union games than league games as its harder to score tries in union (more players on field, no offside gap to impede defences, ball in play less, more penalties awarded, higher tally for penalty goals).

Off course more games in rugby are getting closer because of what you said . :lol:
I heard that Japan just loss to the All Blacks and Israel beat England because there were too many players on the field , ball play less and more penalties .
I also heard that the Bledisloe Cup in Sydney will only have 10,000 fans watching because of too many penalties .

No you've got it wrong Pen. It's 10,000 combined for three full rounds of Sydney club yawnion.

Too many penalties.

Thats about the same as the New Zealand rugby league national club comp.
Do you wonder why Im the only one talking to you on this forum ?
:lol:

 

[screeny]

PW, you're such a nutter. My post had no inkling of league is better than union about it, but just because I posted it you had to respond as though I had been attacking rah rah!! On the contrary I was speaking of a union advantage!

It proves you're genuinely too stupid to offer much to this debate - and many others - except smiley faces.

Man, try and read and understand.

 

[Polynesian Warrior]

Screeny noone can take you seriously on this forum . I was just replying to yarkstorm . Not yours .
There's no point answering to an anti rugby person because you refuse to take anyone's post seriously but yours .
I think you are up there with iggy plop, dimitri and the rest of the One Eye Paranoia Nation .
Man, grow up or Fuc*off .

 

[zulu]

I think the very nature of the code makes even competition a very hard phenomenon for RL to get used to.

Even the slightest advantage in fitness and skill levels equates into a massive scoreline against.

RL's an invasion sport with territory and possession equalling points. Once a side gets on a role they're more likely than not to massacre their opponents.

I've always said it, this is the major technical advantage union has over league. More matches are closer towards the end of union games than league games as its harder to score tries in union (more players on field, no offside gap to impede defences, ball in play less, more penalties awarded, higher tally for penalty goals).

Off course more games in rugby are getting closer because of what you said . :lol:
I heard that Japan just loss to the All Blacks and Israel beat England because there were too many players on the field , ball play less and more penalties .
I also heard that the Bledisloe Cup in Sydney will only have 10,000 fans watching because of too many penalties .

No you've got it wrong Pen. It's 10,000 combined for three full rounds of Sydney club yawnion.

Too many penalties.

That's what I've said all along Ig, too many penlaties ruins the game. Union will never be anything but a reason to cheer on an Australian team a couple of time during the winter, unless it cleans up its act in that regard. They need to get closer to league which is a great game to watch either at the ground or on the tv.

 

[zulu]

Screeny noone can take you seriously on this forum . I was just replying to yarkstorm . Not yours .
There's no point answering to an anti rugby person because you refuse to take anyone's post seriously but yours .
I think you are up there with iggy plop, dimitri and the rest of the One Eye Paranoia Nation .
Man, grow up or Fuc*off .

My idea of paranoia is a union person who parks himself in the international section of a league forum everyday just to make the point that union is a bigger world game. We can't have league fans getting too carried away with their international scene, so PW has to keep them in check. I see you tried the fight club for a bit bag league and praise union, but things got a little too hot for you. I guess the international section is the next best thing hey.

 

[screeny]

PW you utter fool.....you responded to my post by quoting it!!!! And then you say you were responding to Yakstorm not me!!! Can you make yourself look any more useless??!!

Like I said, you're just far, far too stupid to get any sense out of. In fact I'm starting to feel a little sorry for you......

But hey, this isn't TFC but my original posts on the subject were completely relevant and it was you, PW, who took a contrary position to me just for the sake of it.

First the revelation that the USA RU 'pro-league' you were boasting about can't get XV out on the field for some matches, now the Scottish RU debacle, you must be waking up in a cold sweat!