How do we help the rest of the world

[Fast Eddie]

Light years in front huh? Yeah in one of tests, sure you are light years in front, but when it comes to a series against us or the Poms you hardly light years in front.

 

[Blaze]

Australia are pretty dominant though... I think they have won 6 in a row against NZ now, and after all the talk about international league being back after the 2005 Tri Nations, it has been a bit dissapointing.

And I don't really know how we can turn it around... we just have to hope that we get some luck, and produce a couple of smart, skillful halves...

 

[dubby]

Light years in front huh? Yeah in one of tests, sure you are light years in front, but when it comes to a series against us or the Poms you hardly light years in front.

Have you guys beaten us since Stacy Jones retired?

And until you breed a 7, you wont.

 

[Fast Eddie]

We have played you twice since Stacey has retired.....both in one of tests.

 

[PARRA_FAN]

Light years?

No way, Australia is still the no.1 side. But are you forgetting that Great Britain, ranked in 3rd can also match it with Australia.

Great Britain actually beat us last year, (no excuses), even though they struggled in other matches, I think with the talent they have got, they can match it with Australia. Problem is their comp has too many imports, which doesnt allow many of the younger up and coming players through. Mind you I did see a few players in the GF last night, but 1-2 players aint enough.

You can't base the state of the International game on one test. NZL were crock ordinary, and didnt have their best team on the paddock. They will bounce back cause they have got so many good players. As long as we continue the quad nations, pacific up and european cup the game can only get better.

And as mentioned we should play the NZL A Vs Aus Invitational, PNG Vs PMs 13, and Junior Kangaroos vs Tonga, Fiji and Junior Kiwis more often.

btw speaking of Kiwi halves, was Rangi Chase considered, too young perhaps?

 

[Kurt Angle]

Light years?

No way, Australia is still the no.1 side. But are you forgetting that Great Britain, ranked in 3rd can also match it with Australia.

Great Britain actually beat us last year, (no excuses), even though they struggled in other matches, I think with the talent they have got, they can match it with Australia.

If Australia had the mind set of "We are not going to ever lose this game"..... then someone like ben Hornby doesn't get picked for the number 7 jersey.

We will win every game in the world cup, we will pick guys like Thurston for every game, guys liek Lockyer, guys like Inglis, Falou, Hayne, Mason, Hindmarsh.

They will be instructed to give it everything, and treat it like a SOO encounter.

Australia doesn't lose when they play under those conditions, and until the other nations start bringing in programs that can deal with that, then everyone else is playing for silver.

Problem is their comp has too many imports, which doesnt allow many of the younger up and coming players through. Mind you I did see a few players in the GF last night, but 1-2 players aint enough.

You can't base the state of the International game on one test. NZL were crock ordinary, and didnt have their best team on the paddock.

Either did Australia.

They will bounce back cause they have got so many good players. As long as we continue the quad nations, pacific up and european cup the game can only get better.

And as mentioned we should play the NZL A Vs Aus Invitational, PNG Vs PMs 13, and Junior Kangaroos vs Tonga, Fiji and Junior Kiwis more often.

btw speaking of Kiwi halves, was Rangi Chase considered, too young perhaps?

 

[Coastbloke]

The Jnr Roos were lucky against Fiji and suffered losses against Tonga and Jnr Kiwis.

None of those countries had their selected players denied to them. The Snr Kiwis consistently have their players denied to them. By both the NRL and the ESL...

There are additional reasons...In no order

1. NZ's domestic comp really has to take a step up.

2. The NZRL has to draw a line in the sand. They are RLIF members.

3. The talk about Kiwi development has to stop being talk.

4. Kurt Angle is absolutely correct. No other rugby league country - not even the UK - applies athletic science as heavily as Australia does. The NRL is the benchmark. In this day and age of technology and communication, there is no excuse for some countries not to apply similar techniques.

 

[Turbo]

It is sooo obvious that Australia is light years ahead of any country in the world when it comes to Rugby League.

its sooooooooooo obvious you are full of the brown stuff tubby.

aussie are the champions of pointless one off tests. apart from the tri nations series (which you dont have such a sh*thot record) when was the last time aussie promoted the game and toured ?

before the w/cup you have 1 test - probably the ANZAC (cant be f**ked looking it up). big deal.

well if winning 3 out of 4 tri nations since 1999, and nine out of 11 world cups is not dominant, i dunno what is.

 

[ozbash]

i dunno what is.

agree, you dont know.

 

[t-ba]

Kurt's 100% right.

I'd also like to add that the junior structure in Australia kicks the living sh*t out of what's on offer in any other Rugby nursery in the world. It's ruthless, and by FOGS/Flegg level, players are hardened to a level that English raised players will mostly never reach in their professional career. It also develops halves, because of the specialist coaching and the exposure to top flight footballers, which the Kiwis and poms are in dire need of.

That's why so many 'Kiwis' are a product of the Australian sytem. The Cayless Brothers, Inu, MoiMoi and to a lesser extent guys like Benji & SBW have all had the benefit of playing at least some of their developmental years in these competitions.

Suggesting anything else is denial. The next step is to find the funding for at least two, maybe even three junior clubs in New Zealand (Say Auckland, Wellington and the South Island) that can compete from Harold Matthews up.

 

[PARRA_FAN]

With the Warriors included in the U20's it'll help the Kiwis.

Is Auckland Lions still competiting in the Premier League or whatever its called?

 

[Turbo]

i dunno what is.

agree, you dont know.

i know one thing mate, the kiwis have never won a world cup, geez even the poms have won 3

 

[Manu Vatuvei]

The reason Australia dominate is because they have 10 times as much of everything as everyone else and are the only country that *really* cares about league

Australia should beat NZ by 100 every match by rights, and the fact they don't should be mildly embarrassing to them. The Kangaroos are underperformers.

The whole of Australian league would have to underperform terribly to stop being dominant.

The only way NZ can be expected to be competitive is if league suddenly becomes a big sport in NZ.

ummm, yeah....the whole discussion is kinda stupid really. It's like saying "why isn't American Samoa as good as Brazil at soccer?!?" and then ripping into the American Samoans for their coaching structures etc.

 

[Kurt Angle]

China has more people that countries like Holland, yet China doesn;t perform as well as Holland at soccer.

Holland just has good coaching set ups.

 

[Manu Vatuvei]

China has more people that countries like Holland, yet China doesn;t perform as well as Holland at soccer.

Holland just has good coaching set ups.

As well as better standard of living and a higher % of people playing, and interested, in soccer.

NZ and Australia are both first world countries with strong sporting cultures.

However, Australia has a much larger population, AND rugby league is a bigger sport in Australia than in NZ, i.e. even if Australia and NZ had the same population, Australia should still expect to be better

You can't justify money spent on coaching set-ups etc etc that is disproportionate to the actual interest in, and national importance of, the game.

 

[Kurt Angle]

OK, then compare RU in Australia to RU in England

England has a greater population, more money, just as high standard of living and RU is more popular in England than Australia.

Yet Australia is a more successful RU nation.

Simple reason, Australia invested in better coaching in RU.

More resources, such as population and the dormant popularity of the game sure help, but it is all about coaching.

 

[Manu Vatuvei]

lol no, they're just Poms, they're useless at everything

NZ and Australia are both great sporting nations, really, except of course that Australia has approx 5 times the resources for everything except union. Australia would have to go backwards badly for NZ to ever catch up when it comes to league.

As it is I think NZ are capable of overachieving in most sports against most opposition. Australia consistently set the standard for achieving to your maximum in sport, and even if NZ matched Australia, we'd still be 1/5 of what they are. I'm not a fatalist and I'm all for trying, but Australia has to do something WRONG for NZ to get close.

 

[Kurt Angle]

lol no, they're just Poms, they're useless at everything

And likewise, Australians are great at everything.

So not really a direct correlation to finances, just sporting culture and proper coaching and training.

NZ and Australia are both great sporting nations,

Well half right.

really, except of course that Australia has approx 5 times the resources for everything except union. Australia would have to go backwards badly for NZ to ever catch up when it comes to league.

You can only put 17 players on the field at any one time. That is the challenge.

The Kangaroos don't select 85 players in their team.

NZ just has to make sure their 17 is as good as Australia's 17. With lesser resources, it means from their smaller pool they have to do better to get the right 17.

Proper coaching and training will improve their chances of doing that.

As it is I think NZ are capable of overachieving in most sports against most opposition.

??

Other than RU, and one generation in yachting, and a South African chick boosting your netball team when the Australian netball team all retired, what is NZ's sporting claim to fame?

Australia consistently set the standard for achieving to your maximum in sport, and even if NZ matched Australia, we'd still be 1/5 of what they are. I'm not a fatalist and I'm all for trying, but Australia has to do something WRONG for NZ to get close.

No they don't.

NZ just has to do something right... the 17 men that walk out on the field only face 17 Australian players.

That is the challenge.

 

[Manu Vatuvei]

You can only put 17 players on the field at any one time. That is the challenge.

The Kangaroos don't select 85 players in their team.

NZ just has to make sure their 17 is as good as Australia's 17. With lesser resources, it means from their smaller pool they have to do better to get the right 17.

Proper coaching and training will improve their chances of doing that.

No they don't.

NZ just has to do something right... the 17 men that walk out on the field only face 17 Australian players.

That is the challenge.

If you have five times as many players, you're also going to have five times as many international standard players, and your top 17 out of that pool is going to be substantially stronger.

It's like if you picked 17 random players out of the NRL and were asked to make a team out of them, or given 85 random players and told to make the best 17. Obviously the 17 picked from the 85 would be a lot stronger.

It's 17 v 17, yes, and the Australian top 17 is and always should be stronger than the NZ top 17 for pretty obvious reasons.

There's really no logical reason why NZ should ever have a league team that is anywhere near as good as Australia's.

 

[dubby]

Some very valid points here.

It sounds like: grassroots development
coaching and development of staff
more players available (for NZ)
some funding (ok, alot)

will help IRL progress further. Why isnt this happening?





Or is it?