Difference for NZ in winning union and league World Cups

[LeagueXIII]

To all the knockers in the media who drool over the union WC yet bag the league world cup here's a few facts:

For NZ to win the league WC they claim they have to win two tough games yet in the union WC the All Blacks only have to win 3 hard games (this could be argued down to 2 quite easily) and are treated as gods.

Here's the facts of the All Blacks at the union WC;

In pool matches the All Blacks have played 24 games (1987-2011) winning EVERY one at an average 63-12 per game.

Of the 24, 19 times they have scored over 40pts including 3 times breaking 100.

In the QF, SF and Final the All Blacks have won 11 of 16 only ever losing to Australia, Sth Africa and France.

So the media could easily paint a NEGATIVE picture as they do in league of why bother playing the pool games it's a waste of time put the All Blacks straight into the QF's.

Even then if they were to play the teams they have played (1987-2011) in the QF's or SF's such as:

Scotland

Wales

Argentina

Canada

or Ireland

between them these teams have managed only 3 wins in 108 matches and these were by Wales in 1905, 1935 and 1953.

So the media could easily argue why bother??? Put the All Blacks in from the semi finals.

 

[Wilson1]

Why do people feel the need to compare to rugby union so often. You can twist the facts whichever way you please but you have to face reality. The RWC is many times bigger than the RLWC in terms of exposure and competitiveness. So what? If you prefer the RLWC then watch it. All the comparisons saying the RWC isn't that great are just meaningless.

The difference is the All Blacks are the greatest side in world rugby but the Kiwis simply aren't the same in rugby league. It's better to compare the Kangaroos with the All Blacks or the Kiwis with the England rugby team.

For anyone deluded enough to think otherwise:

- The RWC has six more teams and does not manufacture its pools for competitiveness.
- The RWC has an extensive qualification process.
- The RWC recieves higher attendance and higher television ratings.
- The RWC does not have such a huge drop off between the top countries and the next level. I.e. the top 5 in rugby is less well defined with Argentina, Wales making world cup semis.
- The RWC has tougher eligibility laws.

And ya know what? None of it matters. Get over rugby union. Seriously. Both sports can grow (and are growing). In fact rugby union growing will probably be good for rugby league! We are doing the best we can with what we have available but the RLWC is what it is regardless of how big the Rugby World Cup.

I would also add that the only negativity about the RLWC comes from rugby league journalists. Rugby union journalists actually spend their time talking about rugby union.

 

[Brutus]

To all the knockers in the media who drool over the union WC yet bag the league world cup here's a few facts:

For NZ to win the league WC they claim they have to win two tough games yet in the union WC the All Blacks only have to win 3 hard games (this could be argued down to 2 quite easily) and are treated as gods.

Here's the facts of the All Blacks at the union WC;

In pool matches the All Blacks have played 24 games (1987-2011) winning EVERY one at an average 63-12 per game.

Of the 24, 19 times they have scored over 40pts including 3 times breaking 100.

In the QF, SF and Final the All Blacks have won 11 of 16 only ever losing to Australia, Sth Africa and France.

So the media could easily paint a NEGATIVE picture as they do in league of why bother playing the pool games it's a waste of time put the All Blacks straight into the QF's.

Even then if they were to play the teams they have played (1987-2011) in the QF's or SF's such as:

Scotland

Wales

Argentina

Canada

or Ireland

between them these teams have managed only 3 wins in 108 matches and these were by Wales in 1905, 1935 and 1953.

So the media could easily argue why bother??? Put the All Blacks in from the semi finals.

Points well made there mate. The All Blacks are a shoe in for the semis every time.

 

[docbrown]

Why do people feel the need to compare to rugby union so often.

It's about the perception that people promote in our game. Not just rugby league journos like Rothfield, there's a litany of other scumbag journos just waiting to put the boot in. No one's claiming that the Union world cup isn't bigger than League's.

But rather if it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that the All Blacks will win the Bledisloe or make the World Cup Semi Final nobody really writes or claims that those comps are dying or pointless.

Yet Queensland wins State of Origin - "let's scrap Origin it's dead blah blah"
Australia smash Fiji who happen to have had a poor game - "let's have 4 teams only in the world cup blah blah"

The litany of bullshit that fans have to endure just to even have a world cup is beyond f**ked.

So yes I can see where the OP is coming from.

 

[royce10]

Why do people feel the need to compare to rugby union so often. You can twist the facts whichever way you please but you have to face reality. The RWC is many times bigger than the RLWC in terms of exposure and competitiveness. So what? If you prefer the RLWC then watch it. All the comparisons saying the RWC isn't that great are just meaningless.

The difference is the All Blacks are the greatest side in world rugby but the Kiwis simply aren't the same in rugby league. It's better to compare the Kangaroos with the All Blacks or the Kiwis with the England rugby team.

For anyone deluded enough to think otherwise:

- The RWC has six more teams and does not manufacture its pools for competitiveness.
- The RWC has an extensive qualification process.
- The RWC recieves higher attendance and higher television ratings.
- The RWC does not have such a huge drop off between the top countries and the next level. I.e. the top 5 in rugby is less well defined with Argentina, Wales making world cup semis.
- The RWC has tougher eligibility laws.

And ya know what? None of it matters. Get over rugby union. Seriously. Both sports can grow (and are growing). In fact rugby union growing will probably be good for rugby league! We are doing the best we can with what we have available but the RLWC is what it is regardless of how big the Rugby World Cup.

I would also add that the only negativity about the RLWC comes from rugby league journalists. Rugby union journalists actually spend their time talking about rugby union.

Recent history will show that the All Blacks are a more dominant team than the Kangaroos have been.

Why settle for just one code when you can enjoy both?

Although I find RL the more entertaining of the two, I still have huge respect for RU and their skillsets. There are a few players in RU I think can be as good or better than some of their RL counterparts.

 

[Usain Bolt]

Difference between the All Blacks and Kiwis winning the world cups?

250,000 people showed up for the All Blacks victory parade

500 people showed up at Otahuhu Rugby League club rooms for the Kiwis victory "parade"

 

[Dark Chook]

Difference between the All Blacks and Kiwis winning the world cups?

250,000 people showed up for the All Blacks victory parade

500 people showed up at Otahuhu Rugby League club rooms for the Kiwis victory "parade"

LOL:lol:

the 250,000 were sheep

whereas the 500 were deep thinking, responsible, highly talented league fans

 

[LJC]

Difference between the All Blacks and Kiwis winning the world cups?

250,000 people showed up for the All Blacks victory parade

500 people showed up at Otahuhu Rugby League club rooms for the Kiwis victory "parade"

If RU did not have the establishment support it enjoys courtesy of many factors like nation wide playing of the sport in the school system and favourable media coverage then it would be a different story!

I believe the islander element of NZ are more naturally suited to the greater physicality of RL as with the Pacific island nations as a whole. RL allows for more running with the ball and tackles. If you do the math these statements ring true when comparing either sport.

RL is a far democratic form of rugby but it hasn't got the establishment support that RU enjoys. Its not fair but its reality! One day this may change. Let's hope so!

 

[shinobi]

what makes league a more democratic game?

I support the Kiwis and the All Blacks btw.

 

[Yoda]

Difference between the All Blacks and Kiwis winning the world cups?

250,000 people showed up for the All Blacks victory parade

500 people showed up at Otahuhu Rugby League club rooms for the Kiwis victory "parade"

The same cumulative IQ though

 

[Tone83]

All union has is more mid-tier nations that are somewhat competent. It still just has a big 3 in NZ, SA and England, with a clear favourite out of those. Just like league except in league replace SA with Aus and make aus the clear favourite instead of nz.

But yeah anyway as long as union keep poaching league players that go and dominate their game and make them look bad and make rugby league look good we shouldn't complain. SBW and Folau did more for rugby league going to union than anyone has on a league field.

 

[Tone83]

Recent history will show that the All Blacks are a more dominant team than the Kangaroos have been.

Only because their competition's worse.

The kangaroos and the kiwis are both better than the all blacks.

 

[Rod]

The kangaroos and the kiwis are both better than the all blacks.

:lol:

Not only are the AB's the best rugby team in the world you could make a pretty convincing argument they're the best sports team on the planet period.

 

[Masoe_eats_babies]

New Zealand has to beat a country with a quality league team to win the world cup - the All Blacks had to beat France.

 

[Tone83]

:lol:

Not only are the AB's the best rugby team in the world you could make a pretty convincing argument they're the best sports team on the planet period.

And yet Brad Thorn, a near 40 year old broncos reject, waltzed onto their team. Lol! He sure as shit wouldn't have been given a Kiwi or Kangaroos jumper at that stage in his career.

The best rugby based sports team on the planet are the kangaroos. There are at least 6 players currently on the team better than any all black ever in history. Besides maybe SBW the nrl player, and Lomu, who was a legit nrl-star-calibre rugby player, but the only one.

 

[royce10]

And yet Brad Thorn, a near 40 year old broncos reject, waltzed onto their team. Lol! He sure as shit wouldn't have been given a Kiwi or Kangaroos jumper at that stage in his career.

The best rugby based sports team on the planet are the kangaroos. There are at least 6 players currently on the team better than any all black ever in history. Besides maybe SBW the nrl player, and Lomu, who was a legit nrl-star-calibre rugby player, but the only one.

Julian Savea would be a beast on the wing in the NRL. He would make Vatuvei his bitch imo.

 

[Brutus]

Julian Savea would be a beast on the wing in the NRL. He would make Vatuvei his bitch imo.

Who?

 

[Springs]

The Kangaroos are the best rugby team on the planet and if the Wallabies had access to their players then Australia would win every Rugby World Cup, only rivalled by NZ and England if they had access to their league players.

 

[maccattack]

:lol:

you could make a pretty convincing argument they're the best sports team on the planet period.

Go on then...

I'll grab the popcorn.

 

[Rod]

Go on then...

I'll grab the popcorn.

How could they not at least be bloody close? Sitting on consecutive win streaks of 19-1 and 14-0 against 11 different legitimate full-time teams. The idea that a team that plays about 4 games a year mostly against 2 full-time legitimate teams is better than them is pretty hilarious.

As for world sport as a whole, I don't know who else achieves what they do on a consistent basis in such a global sport. Maybe the US basketball team would go close but even they don't face the consistent challenges that the All Blacks do.