Can international RL ever be really competitive?

[bobbis]

Out of those the best prospect is france, which requires fully professional clubs playing in the SL, itll take at least a decade and thats being optimistic before France could compete.

I can see the theory behind that statement, however just to be annoying I'm going to disagree with you. Whilst France do requre a professional setup prior to being truely competitive against the top 3, I feel they are in a good position to move up and be so in even just 5 years simply cause they have the talented individuals coming through.

France has been no strangers to defeating Australia, UK and/or NZ in the junior levels, meaning they have kids coming through who can play. They also have a decent enough playing base to build a competitive side, and of course there is always the potential to take talented youth from Union, not all the good quality kids can make the Les Blues'.

England have dramatically improved their youth system and thus their national side in around 3 years, lead by Waite, no reason why he can't do the same in France, plus I think he is starting with a higher quality product to begin with. The French play a totally different style of Rugby League to the other three, which is both refreshing, as well seems to daunt the big three a bit already. Imagine if they had the fitness to go 80 minutes.

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.

 

[rugged]

Its possible to have near total possesion in RU, a superior side won't loss its ball at the ruck. While in RL a cr*p side is gauranteed possesion so long as it can hold on 6 tackles. The 6 tackle rule makes it such that lesser teams get possesion.

Also, if the poorer team in RU gets a penalty (assuming it is in their own half as they will mostly be there), they would do a free kick to the sideline. They would then have to do a lineout instead of just a tap. So if they are bad they won't get the ball back from there either.

Also, even if the good team is kicking off to the bad team in RU, the good team can regain the ball from this more readily than in RU as the kickoffs are usually contested.

And if the good team in RU knocks on, the scrum will be real and the poorer team probably won't get the ball.

 

[screeny]

Well argued points Bobbis and rugged, but in RU the ball is in play that much less, and offensive infringements are almost inevitable, that the physical toll on a defensive side is far less than it would be on a league side forced to defend most of the match.

Also in league the scoring side receives kick off (stupid rule IMO).

Anyway, I maintain that RL's biggest threat to achieving an even int'l competition is the sheer physicality of RL and a team that doesn't have the benefit of professional standard fitness levels will be crushed.

 

[rugged]

Also in league the scoring side receives kick off (stupid rule IMO).

#-o Pretty sure that happens in union too. #-o

 

[bobbis]

Offensive infringements while they do happen aren't going to play a major role for a team that has more than 90% possesion. The amount of offensive infringments wouldnt be great it might give the opposition a chance for a couple of 3 pointers but its not going to help them keep the game competitive or have much effect on possesion as within 2 or 3 phases its most probable theyll have tunred the ball over again.

While the league team is forced to defend most of the match maybe 60% of the time the union team would be would be defending 90% of the time, theyll also have less men in the lineup and more players will be working each play due to rucks and mauls. In every contest, ruck maul, scrum and lineout 8 forwards for the inferior team are working and it takes its physical toll, you might consider these facets of play as time in which the ball isn't in play however its a major part of RU and takes its physical toll as well as determines who has possesion.

Yes as Rugged stated offensive team receives in RU too. Given in RL they kick it so that the team receives it in their ingoal they have to travel 100 metres in 6 tackles and score or lose possesion, they could also force a dropout. So in effect for a RL side to acheive the 90% possesion which is possible in league they have to travel 100 metres every 6 tackles and score or force a drop out. The gulf in standard necesary for this to happen is far greater than in RU.

In RU a team without professional fitness standards will be crushed too.

 

[inertia666]

oh for f**ks sakes guys....i've outta this forum for good.

how many more f**king times do i have to read about which code is the faster , stronger , harder , what-the-hell-ever.

BORING BORING BORING BORING.

this thread had f**k all to do with any of that and the usual people bring it down.

see you later.

 

[Unknown Pleasures]

oh for f**ks sakes guys....i've outta this forum for good.

how many more f**king times do i have to read about which code is the faster , stronger , harder , what-the-hell-ever.

BORING BORING BORING BORING.

this thread had f**k all to do with any of that and the usual people bring it down.

see you later.

I agree. Every thread turns in to this stupid debate, which is NEVER going to be finished.
What do you think one day a RU person will come on here and see a post from a RL person and say "hey he's right, I'm gonna follow RL now"?

NO!!!! So get over these boring RU V RL threads.

 

[rugged]

Just put it in the fight club.

Anyway, there's not much else to do in the off season.

An intelligent debate is alright, as long as it's not invaded by the no-brainer sewer brigade.

 

[screeny]

Bye then Inertia666. Funny thing about people who make a song and dance about leaving, they're almost always certain to be back.

I admit it...I am very boring. But as rugged says as long as it's reasoned debate we shouldn't find anything wrong with it.

Anyway, get stuffed! My original point was totally, completely and absolutely relevant to the topic and if you can't see that, well.......

 

[iggy plop]

Out of those the best prospect is france, which requires fully professional clubs playing in the SL, itll take at least a decade and thats being optimistic before France could compete.

I can see the theory behind that statement, however just to be annoying I'm going to disagree with you. Whilst France do requre a professional setup prior to being truely competitive against the top 3, I feel they are in a good position to move up and be so in even just 5 years simply cause they have the talented individuals coming through.

France has been no strangers to defeating Australia, UK and/or NZ in the junior levels, meaning they have kids coming through who can play. They also have a decent enough playing base to build a competitive side, and of course there is always the potential to take talented youth from Union, not all the good quality kids can make the Les Blues'.

And it's not like France have never been good. After all, they were the last team to beat Australia in a 3 match series and regularly beat us in the 50's and 60's.

There are several towns in the south of France with a rugby league mentality. If the English Super League team can succeed and money can be put back into the development of the game over there we may have a big 4 not too far down the track. It's all about retaining players with potential and keeping them from the yawnion scouts.

 

[iggy plop]

oh for f*** sakes guys....i've outta this forum for good.

how many more f***ing times do i have to read about which code is the faster , stronger , harder , what-the-hell-ever.

BORING BORING BORING BORING.

this thread had f**k all to do with any of that and the usual people bring it down.

see you later.

ta ta.

 

[taipan]

Its possible to have near total possesion in RU, a superior side won't loss its ball at the ruck. While in RL a cr*p side is gauranteed possesion so long as it can hold on 6 tackles. The 6 tackle rule makes it such that lesser teams get possesion.

Also, if the poorer team in RU gets a penalty (assuming it is in their own half as they will mostly be there), they would do a free kick to the sideline. They would then have to do a lineout instead of just a tap. So if they are bad they won't get the ball back from there either.

Also, even if the good team is kicking off to the bad team in RU, the good team can regain the ball from this more readily than in RU as the kickoffs are usually contested.

And if the good team in RU knocks on, the scrum will be real and the poorer team probably won't get the ball.

Rugged one thing I will disagree with is the scrum,the scrum is 99.9% won by the team of the feeding side(whether it is real or not). Also I have seen so many blatant knock ons out of a ruck ignored by the ref,maybe the poorer side would get a fair share of possession if it was strictly policed.
My bone of contention in the lineouts,is why the jumper has to be lifted,a real contest would be the jumper doing it on his own.
That is the reason why the unlimited tackle was banished from rugby league,teams supposedly have the opportunity to have 50/50 possession.The NRL teams are more and more closely matched in terms of skill(eg Cowboys) that the 6 tackle rule has resulted in more closer scores/contests/and evening out of the comp.
BTW if an exceptional team such as the Bulldogs played a weakend Souths,with a continuous run of tries,meaning the defending side kicks off and the attacking side continues to get possession.
IMO the three things people watching rugby league matches look at are ball skills,attacking football,and rugged defence full stop.They rarely get thrills out of kicks except the 40/20s and sideline conversions(bombs are too predictable and real lotteries),and couldnt give a rats about the structure or power of scrums,they just want to get the scrum over and the ball in play.
Getting back to the real subject, rugby league can be competitive internationally,you can add France to the equation certainly by 2008,and I believe Wales with their conference structures and players playing ESL can be added.
PNG if they get up to 2 teams in the Qld cup in the next couple of years sure can,and the Pacific islands-Cook Islands and Tonga with some NRL
players.
the unknowns Russia(in some sort of turmoil ATM) USA need to get a lot of juniors within a few years ditto Lebanon>anycase they all need financial support and equipment and training and competition

 

[carlnz]

Wales are developing well at all age groups, Lebanon need their Australian based players to be competive same with Tonga and Cooks...Fiji will do ok...USA can surprise anyone...Ireland strong tuff team...France - who knows what mood they turn up in...PNG ditto team..

 

[rugged]

Rugged one thing I will disagree with is the scrum,the scrum is 99.9% won by the team of the feeding side(whether it is real or not).

I disagree with this point, after all we are talking about a really weak team against a really strong team, with a real contested scrum.

My bone of contention in the lineouts,is why the jumper has to be lifted,a real contest would be the jumper doing it on his own.

It's still a contest as to who has the best jumpers and lifters, and it looks a lot more exciting.

That is the reason why the unlimited tackle was banished from rugby league,teams supposedly have the opportunity to have 50/50 possession.

Could you go into a little more detail as I'm not sure what you mean.

The NRL teams are more and more closely matched in terms of skill(eg Cowboys) that the 6 tackle rule has resulted in more closer scores/contests/and evening out of the comp.

I think that sort of proves that it is harder to get more even contests in union.

BTW if an exceptional team such as the Bulldogs played a weakend Souths,with a continuous run of tries,meaning the defending side kicks off and the attacking side continues to get possession.

That happens in union too as the scorer receives the ball.

IMO the three things people watching rugby league matches look at are ball skills,attacking football,and rugged defence full stop.

Agreed.

bombs are too predictable and real lotteries

Hard to be predictable and lotteries at the same time! But I also dislike the bomb as it is like admitting that you've got nothing else up your sleeve. Many would disagree as it is a legitimate tactic if your opposition has trouble under the high ball and many players do skillful things with spiral bombs etc.

Getting back to the real subject, rugby league can be competitive internationally,you can add France to the equation certainly by 2008,and I believe Wales with their conference structures and players playing ESL can be added.
PNG if they get up to 2 teams in the Qld cup in the next couple of years sure can,and the Pacific islands-Cook Islands and Tonga with some NRL

I hope this can come true.

 

[taipan]

quote
I disagree with this point, after all we are talking about a really weak team against a really strong team, with a real contested scrum.

In all my years watching union I could count the number of scrums won against the feed regardless of the strength/weakness of the teams involved,just my experience. Sure there is a better chance when one team has a monster pack compared to the oppo.

It's still a contest as to who has the best jumpers and lifters, and it looks a lot more exciting.
Exciting yes than the scrums,I still want to test the ability of the jumper,not a couple of teammates giving him a leg up.

That is the reason why the unlimited tackle was banished from rugby league,teams supposedly have the opportunity to have 50/50 possession.

Could you go into a little more detail as I'm not sure what you mean.

In the days when the great St George team won 11 G/Fs on the trot they were virtually unbeatable,once they had possession in the unlimited tackle days the opposition had b....all chance of getting the ball.
Limited tackle football 4 and then 6 tackle was brought in to give both teams an opportunity if they were good enough of a fair slice of possession.60/40/ 55/45 etc etc .The chances of a repeat of the St George
icredible sequence,will never be repeated,and that means every NRL team provided they have the cattle can win the G/F.

The NRL teams are more and more closely matched in terms of skill(eg Cowboys) that the 6 tackle rule has resulted in more closer scores/contests/and evening out of the comp.

I think that sort of proves that it is harder to get more even contests in union.

Correct and that is what the league fan wants uncertainty,not going to a game with the knowledge your team is a certainty to be drubbed.

BTW if an exceptional team such as the Bulldogs played a weakend Souths,with a continuous run of tries,meaning the defending side kicks off and the attacking side continues to get possession.

That happens in union too as the scorer receives the ball.

Agreed thats why I emphasise the importance of trying to get a level playing field in the strength of league teams.

IMO the three things people watching rugby league matches look at are ball skills,attacking football,and rugged defence full stop.

Agreed.

bombs are too predictable and real lotteries

Hard to be predictable and lotteries at the same time! But I also dislike the bomb as it is like admitting that you've got nothing else up your sleeve. Many would disagree as it is a legitimate tactic if your opposition has trouble under the high ball and many players do skillful things with spiral bombs etc.

Bombs IMO are predictable on the 6th taclkle when attacking in the 20 metres opo line.They certainly are a lottery if the fullback EG fumbles and the ball rolls in the in goal and every man and his dog tries to leap on it.

 

[rugged]

Bombs IMO are predictable on the 6th taclkle when attacking in the 20 metres opo line.

Yes, very boring.

I think that sort of proves that it is harder to get more even contests in union.

Correct and that is what the league fan wants uncertainty,not going to a game with the knowledge your team is a certainty to be drubbed.

This was an argument we were debating in another thread and the "RL only" guy was saying the opposite to you. I agree it is easier to get bigger margins in union, which is why in some of the world cup games (2003) the opposition wasn't that bad but the scores looked like it was a bad game.

quote
I disagree with this point, after all we are talking about a really weak team against a really strong team, with a real contested scrum.

In all my years watching union I could count the number of scrums won against the feed regardless of the strength/weakness of the teams involved,just my experience. Sure there is a better chance when one team has a monster pack compared to the oppo.

Guess I've watched too many junior union games, it happens a lot there.

 

[gladiator]

It is also easier for the weaker side to put points on the board in union, due to the large number of penalties in the game. Its not uncommon for a badly beaten side to score 20/30 points mostly from goals/feild goals.
In league a team relies on scoring the try more, this can be very difficult against a much higher quality side. Obviously if the weak side can't score and the quality side can the margin will blow out quickly.

 

[bobbis]

Rugged one thing I will disagree with is the scrum,the scrum is 99.9% won by the team of the feeding side(whether it is real or not). Also I have seen so many blatant knock ons out of a ruck ignored by the ref,maybe the poorer side would get a fair share of possession if it was strictly policed.

Your right at the top level between evenly matched teams its negligible the number of times the balls won against the feed, we were refering to unevenly matched teams though. Also a good scrum creates push over trys, as well as disrupts the quality of possesion, if your scrum goes backwards you get sh*t ball, which counts when the offside line is the otherside of the srum and the ball is contested at the breakdown.

think that sort of proves that it is harder to get more even contests in union.

Correct and that is what the league fan wants uncertainty,not going to a game with the knowledge your team is a certainty to be drubbed.

Screeny was arguing the opposite that due to its nature Union was inherently easier to compete in.

Anyway back to the topic, no reason international league can't be truly competitve I just wouldn't expect league minnows like Lebanon or Scotland to be competitve anytime soon if ever. The real hope is NZ or Gb beating Australia and perhaps France joining them to create 4 quality countries.

 

[carlnz]

France YES
Lebanon YES
Ireland YES
Wales YES
Scotland NO
Russia NO
PNG YES
TONGA YES
Cook Islands MAYBE
Samoa MAYBE
USA MAYBE

 

[Polynesian Warrior]

i dont want to take a shot at Union....but how many teams would be able to beat the top 4-5 in Union(NZ, OZ, SA, ENG, FRA)? practically none....but doesnt mean Union is poor Internationally.....

Well Argentina have beat France and also South Africa and Ireland have beaten England and South Africa .