Last night Wallaby loss shows why Union the inferior game

[Kurt Angle]

so a maul is a backline raid?

:lol:

 

[t-ba]

I was finishing off an assignment last night, and I watched a bit of the Fiji game. It was pretty funny watching one of World Onion's most feared defensive units failing to cope with a couple of passes from the Fijians.

They're light years behind when it comes to tactics.

 

[S.S.T.I.D]

The only juggernaut that can be attributed to union is its media pull. More than a few here have fallen for it.

 

[Johns Magic]

Pete - emphasis on teh word "competetive". International netball is more competetive than League.

JM's saying it's BETTER. Get it right.

Case in point. Wallabies lost to a side with fat, slow old Andy Farrell in the CENTRES!!!!!!!

Therefore, Carl Webb could be a centre in of the best international Yawnion sides. :lol:

Where did I ever say it was better? Quote me you fool.

Pete's absolutely right, all I ever said was that international union is far more competitive than international league.

 

[Johns Magic]

Go f**k yourself you snotty nosed little knowall.

So wipe out someones history just to suit your agenda, get stuffed moron.

Have they ever stopped playing?

No.

How many tests have Ire, Sct and Wales Union won against Aus in the last 50 years c**k sucker?

How about removing the kangaroos 30 years of winning stuff all against the poms?

Or better yet, how about removing the poms last 30 years because they haven't won jack?

Idiot!

How competitive France was 30 years ago is completely different from how competitive they are now. We're talking about how competitive international league is, not how competitive it used to be.

Seriously, you are an idiot. You don't seem to have quite grasped the topic of conversation yet. Keep trying though mate, you might get there one day.

 

[RABK]

That's funnier than Charlie Saab yelling "Queenslander" each morning on the train at Marrikcville!!!!!

:LOL:

Next wallabies backline:

15: Fitzgibbon
14: Beattie
13: Webcke
12: Payton
11: Nutley

they may even make the semis with this lot! LOL.

:LOL:

A maul is when they are all upright and moving slowly towards to opposition goal line

so a maul is a backline raid?

:LOL:


f**king classic stuff. :LOL:

 

[Johns Magic]

Rubbish.

for one , the wallabies first choice halfback and former captain George Gregan didnt tour.

their best forward got injured in the first game ( dan vickerman)

Mat Rogers played 2 games at No 10.:lol:

Tai Mcissac played 2 games at hooker.

Phil Waugh and george smith spilt the 4 games.

Lote played 2 games in the centres.

Mat Gituea played all the games at halfaback.:lol:

Sorry, but you have no idea what youre talking about!

This was the Wallabies team that Ireland beat:


Australia: C Latham; C Rathbone, L Tuqiri, S Mortlock (capt), M Gerrard; S Larkham, M Giteau; A Baxter, T McIsaac, G Shepherdson, N Sharpe, M Chisholm, R Elsom, P Waugh, W Palu.
Replacements: S Moore, B Robinson, A Campbell, G Smith, J Valentine, M Rogers, S Staniforth.

At the time McIsaac was considered the number 1 hooker in the country(God knows why), and Giteau was genuinely being tried out at halfback, and they were trying to get Lote more involved at outside.

That wasn't a second-string Wallabies side, it just had a few players playing out of position.

so let me get this straight. One team outside of the top 5 countries finally makes the semi finals and this is a reflection of how all of union is becoming more competitive?:lol:

ive never heard so much tripe.

In order for a pattern to start developing you need more than one instance to start proving your point.

Wait til the next World Cup. Fiji gave South Africa a scare last night too.

 

[Misty Bee]

Johns Magic, I think League is quite competetive. In recent years, two of the top 3 nations have won the tri nations, the latter by a try in extra time. Australia A just drew with PNG a few weeks ago. England is in the mix, too.

re France, you asked if France had ever beaten Australia in the last 30 years. when confronted with a "yes", you pretended it was 50 years ago.

No one's arguing that the top escelon of nations at the higher end of the Union scale, out of over 200, is 5, opposed to League's 3. Therefore, Union is 1% better than League as a world sport.

I concede, you have not been saying that Union is 'better'. But you sure have been arguing hard against those saying that it's sh*t!

 

[Johns Magic]

Johns Magic, I think League is quite competetive. In recent years, two of the top 3 nations have won the tri nations, the latter by a try in extra time. Australia A just drew with PNG a few weeks ago. England is in the mix, too.

re France, you asked if France had ever beaten Australia in the last 30 years. when confronted with a "yes", you pretended it was 50 years ago.

No one's arguing that the top escelon of nations at the higher end of the Union scale, out of over 200, is 5, opposed to League's 3. Therefore, Union is 1% better than League as a world sport.

I concede, you have not been saying that Union is 'better'. But you sure have been arguing hard against those saying that it's sh*t!

No, I did concede that France had beaten Australia in the last 30 years. But it was 29 years and 10 months ago.

I then mixed up the amount of years a few posts later, saying 50 instead of 30.

The difference with union's "top five" and league's "top three", is that countries like Ireland, Wales and Argentina beat union's top five fairly regularly and other nations like Tonga, Scotland and Fiji can compete with them on their day.

In league, no one can beat the top three, or even get close.

That wasn't Australia A, it was the PM's XIII. Still, it was a good sign for PNG rugby league, but it wasn't Australia's second best possible side.

Please explain how you came up with that 1% figure as well.

 

[Misty Bee]

Fair enough then

 

[Different kind of Rabbit]

The argument about which code is more competitive at the international level means bugger all. At the end of the day, League is a much better game and here is why:

1) Less Stoppages
2) Less involvement from the officials
3) Less confusing rules
4) Better scrum, (yes I agree that in pronciple, union scrums are more competitive but in practice, more than half end up in a stoppage. They take forever to set and get right and usually just result in penalties)
5) Better scoring system. (3 points for penalties and drop goals FFS! Where is the encouragement for teams to be entertaining and actually try to get over the try line!)
6) Better onside rule (10 metres allow's playmakers more time to weave some magic result is a more open and entertaining game)
7) Less reliance on kicking.

These are just 7 reasons that I have thought of in less than a minute. If I actually applied myself I could write an absolute thesis. 100 years ago people realised that Union had some issues so Rugby League was invented. 100 years later, the game invented to be better than Union, still is. If only the administration and promotion of Rugby League were as good as Union? This is the only thing that lets the game down IMO.

 

[Johns Magic]

The argument about which code is more competitive at the international level means bugger all. At the end of the day, League is a much better game and here is why:

1) Less Stoppages
2) Less involvement from the officials
3) Less confusing rules
4) Better scrum, (yes I agree that in pronciple, union scrums are more competitive but in practice, more than half end up in a stoppage. They take forever to set and get right and usually just result in penalties)
5) Better scoring system. (3 points for penalties and drop goals FFS! Where is the encouragement for teams to be entertaining and actually try to get over the try line!)
6) Better onside rule (10 metres allow's playmakers more time to weave some magic result is a more open and entertaining game)
7) Less reliance on kicking.

These are just 7 reasons that I have thought of in less than a minute. If I actually applied myself I could write an absolute thesis. 100 years ago people realised that Union had some issues so Rugby League was invented. 100 years later, the game invented to be better than Union, still is. If only the administration and promotion of Rugby League were as good as Union? This is the only thing that lets the game down IMO.

One thing union has over league is that backlines get more space, but that's about it.

 

[Different kind of Rabbit]

One thing union has over league is that backlines get more space, but that's about it.

Agree, but the ball never gets out there! Case in point was Tuqiri the other night. He touched the ball 3 maybe 4 times? The bloke who teaches Union players how to throw an inside ball should be shot! It is so frustrating to see these enormous backlines set and the ball goes through 2 sets of hands and then they turn it back inside to a prop who runs straight back into the previous ruck!

 

[Johns Magic]

Agree, but the ball never gets out there! Case in point was Tuqiri the other night. He touched the ball 3 maybe 4 times? The bloke who teaches Union players how to throw an inside ball should be shot! It is so frustrating to see these enormous backlines set and the ball goes through 2 sets of hands and then they turn it back inside to a prop who runs straight back into the previous ruck!

The All Blacks are great to watch because they give the ball to their speedsters out wide.

Connolly's gameplan of keeping it in the forwards was ridiculous considering the strength of the English front-row and the talent Australia have out wide.

 

[buster bunny]

One thing union has over league is that backlines get more space, but that's about it.

They might get more space but after watching some of the games in the world cups few teams know how to use it to their advantage. Its frustrating how whenever some teams get an overlap they end up just passing it to an overweight player who runs an amazing 2 metres before getting tackled or losing the ball.

As people have already said Rugby Union is only more competitive because most teams suck equally. In Rugby League the top 3 teams are just on a level of their own. How else can you explain someone like Berrick Barnes walking into the wallabies or the fact that Rogers went from playing internationals in union to not even making a state side in Rugby League.

Funny enough the thing that has made Rugby League a better sport (professionalism) is also the thing that hurts our international game. Australia, NZ and GB are just that more skillful and organised that it is hard for the newer nations to catch up.

In saying this I would rather watch an entertaining and skillful game of rugby league even if its a club game than watch a 'competitive' international rugby union game that is boring and full of unfit players who drop the ball every five minutes.

 

[Johns Magic]

They might get more space but after watching some of the games in the world cups few teams know how to use it to their advantage. Its frustrating how whenever some teams get an overlap they end up just passing it to an overweight player who runs an amazing 2 metres before getting tackled or losing the ball.

As people have already said Rugby Union is only more competitive because most teams suck equally. In Rugby League the top 3 teams are just on a level of their own. How else can you explain someone like Berrick Barnes walking into the wallabies or the fact that Rogers went from playing internationals in union to not even making a state side in Rugby League.

Funny enough the thing that has made Rugby League a better sport (professionalism) is also the thing that hurts our international game. Australia, NZ and GB are just that more skillful and organised that it is hard for the newer nations to catch up.

In saying this I would rather watch an entertaining and skillful game of rugby league even if its a club game than watch a 'competitive' international rugby union game that is boring and full of unfit players who drop the ball every five minutes.

Firstly, Barnes was heralded as a future league rep player when he was at the Broncos. It then took him two seasons to make the Wallabies, and that was only because Larkham got injured. Hardly 'walking into the Wallabies'.

Rogers is now past it, which is why he was dropped from the Wallabies.

The All Blacks have more skill than the Kiwi's.

 

[buster bunny]

Firstly, Barnes was heralded as a future league rep player when he was at the Broncos. It then took him two seasons to make the Wallabies, and that was only because Larkham got injured. Hardly 'walking into the Wallabies'.

Rogers is now past it, which is why he was dropped from the Wallabies.

The All Blacks have more skill than the Kiwi's.

Firstly would Barnes make the Kangaroos if he still played league?

Rogers is still a better player than most in the current wallabies side

I am still not convinced that a full NZ rugby league side (without injuries) would lose to the All Blacks especially given their record of choking and the fact they could not beat France in the recent quater final

 

[The Tank]

In league, no one can beat the top three, or even get close.

Australia (because they're pricks that run and ruin the international game) only play Tests against NZ and GB regularly. Every now and then a Test against France is included.

Since 2000 Australia has played France (04,05) twice and Papua New Guinea (00,01) twice. The last 2 times NZ have played France (04,05) they won 38-22 and 24-20 - seems fairly competitive to me. GB have only played France twice since 01.

So how do you know if they can't be beaten when they hardly ever play. The only time they play developing nations - or even second tier nations - is during World Cups.

 

[Misty Bee]

the Awl Blicks would absolutely LOVE to have anyone with the talent of Benji or SBW, the emerging Inu or the elderly Vagana, Wiki or the legendary Jones in their ranks.

 

[Johns Magic]

Firstly would Barnes make the Kangaroos if he still played league?

How would I know? He wouldn't make it in front of Thurston, but he didn't make it in front of Larkham either. If he wasn't a Queenslander I'm confident that he would play Origin.

Rogers is still a better player than most in the current wallabies side

Which is why he got dropped from the Wallabies :lol:

I am still not convinced that a full NZ rugby league side (without injuries) would lose to the All Blacks especially given their record of choking and the fact they could not beat France in the recent quater final

Dan Carter is everything that the Kiwi's wish they had.