Recruits for Union

[imported_Roopy4246]

In the paper this morning there was a list of gains/losses for Sydney grade Union sides. I counted a total of 15 players who were from NRL clubs, but the onlytwo I recognised were Lote and Lenny Beckett.
I think there were a similar number last year, also mostly guys who are now too old for the juniors and not good enough for the seniors in League.
I watched a few games of grade union on the ABC last year and half the time you would swear you were watching a poor standard game of League.

It will be interesting to watch what happens to the way Union is played in Australia with this huge League influence going into the game.

 

[legend]

I actually think the quality of all three S12 sides is a lot lower than what it was two years ago. The Reds are candidates for the wooden spoon while the Waratahs are still a long way off from winning the S12 comp. It's all NZ at the moment and with Kefu, Gregan and Larkham at the end of their careers, who do they have coming through to replace these guys?

Unless Union starts looking after it's own juniors, there will be a massive letdown after the RWC as I don't think the Wallabies will even make the semis.

 

[imported_Oracle]

Legend, there's more talented juniors then given credit for.

There should be more, and when we get a 4th Super 12 side there will be, but for now we have some prospects like:

Mark Gerrard (been in sensational form for the Brumbies the last 3 weeks)
Gene Fairbanks (played for the Reds against the Chiefs. They lost but Fairbanks was very good)
Jone Tawake (very big, powerful, next year will get more games for the tahs)
Matt Giteau (a very exciting prospect. I think he'll be the fly half for Australia in a few years, and if he keeps improving from what he did last week against the Bulls I would slot him in at no 12 for the world cup this year)
Horua (can't remember his first name but has been impressive for the Brumbies at no 6 covering for Finegan, good pace and skill)
Danial Heenen (haven't seen much of him myself but John Eales has big raps on him, a possible Wallaby lock in years to come)

These are just a few off the top of my head, but a lot of the Wallaby's and fringe Wallaby's are also quite young. There's noone older than 21 in that list and there's also guys like David Lyons, Phil Waugh, George Smith etc that haven't reached 23 yet.

I think the front row is the major point of concern. We have a few good scrummaging props like Noriega, Bill Young and Rod Moore but we don't have any props that are both excellent scrummagers and good around the field. Hopefully Dunning can develop into one of those sort of players. He's 24 I think, which is still relatively young for a prop, of whom normally reach their peak in their late 20's, early 30's.

 

[imported_pastor-borderline]

G'day Orra'a

Your Waratahs are looking good for a top four finish this year (with the exception of last week)...how do you see the Blues and the Brumbies this week?

 

[imported_Mystery_Man]

Australian rugby union will be screwed over the next couple of years with the S12 teams struggling and the core of the Wallabies heading overseas. Except a new round of league raids following the world cup. Unless the NRL is proactive about this, they could lose some of their best players as the ARU will be cashed up.

 

[legend]

Oracle, with a mass exodus of senior players, how on earth will the ARU be able to field a fourth side? They are having trouble fielding three sides at the moment with the Reds anchored at the bottom of the ladder and it's fair to say their junior development is not up to scratch hence the ongoing purchases of rugby league has beens like Ryan McGoldrick, Duncan McRae and Wendell Sailor, who, in all honesty has been a dud buy for the ARU in terms of performance.

Without the purchase of RL players, Union would be further up shit creek.

BTW, has anyone seen the Waratahs ad doing the rounds at the moment? I saw it while watching the footy tonight and while the ad is ok, it fails to show one thing and that's the game itself. Absolutely no footage of any Rugby whatsoever. The closest they get is Phil Waugh and Matt Burke running down the tunnell. Could there be a reason for this? It was quite a contrast to the That's My Team ad campaign by the NRL which is far superior in every aspect., especially footage of the game. At the end of the day, it speaks volumes about both codes.

Watch this space as I am sure this very issue will be raised in Sunday's papers.

 

[imported_Oracle]

Meth, sorry for the late reply. I actually tipped the Brumbies last night, but I guess the Blues are just too good at the moment. Carlos Spencer must be close to the no 10 jersey for the All Blacks, while Rupeni and Howlett are just blowing opposition backlines away. I wish it could have been played on a dry track though, I think the Brumbies would have been closer if it was.

Legend, there are something like 50 Australian players plying their trade in Europe at the moment. A lot of these players are quite young. The 4th side would be made up of these players, the young players in the Sydney and Brisbane Club comps, and maybe a couple of league recruits.

I think it's also important to point out that only 3 league players (Sailor, Tuquiri, Rogers) were bought by the ARU. All the other league recruits (and I don't count Duncan Mcrae as he's played far more union than league) were bought by the NSWRU, many of whom (eg Blacklock) actually knocked on rugby's door. The state sides can only pay players (who are contracted by the ARU)up to $150 000 extra to play for them. The top players are paid most of their money by the ARU. The League guys are not costing the state unions anymore than anyone else, they're actually making money for them.

As for the Waratahs ad. It's been on for a while. There's one for QLD and the Brumbies too which are exactly the same. They're not ads so much to promote Rugby, they're ads to promote the particular home games these sides are playing, hence the last page saying tickets from ticketek etc.

The main Rugby ad is the Kasie Chambers True Colours campaign which will be back on air soon.

I also hope that come the World Cup the 'It's the woooorrrllld, in union' song is being played too as it's such a great song for the game!Gives me the goosebumps!

 

[imported_Te Kaha]

: Oracle
Meth, sorry for the late reply. I actually tipped the Brumbies last night, but I guess the Blues are just too good at the moment. Carlos Spencer must be close to the no 10 jersey for the All Blacks, while Rupeni and Howlett are just blowing opposition backlines away. I wish it could have been played on a dry track though, I think the Brumbies would have been closer if it was.

Not a chance. The Brumbies are suffering the same problem as the rest of the Aussie sides. Crap forwards. For the last few years the Aussies have been playing a bastardisation of League commiting only a couple of players to each breakdown and having a de-facto play the ball. Boring but effective. The Crusadersplay a little like that as well. As a result the last few years the game has been going backwards. With the rule changes allowing forwards to "step of the ball" in a ruck and "blow out" the appossing players to recover the ball, there has been more empahsis on forward play and commiting more players to the ruck. The blues, as seen a number of times last night, showed they have mastered it. The Aussies haven't. They also still empoly the league Straight line of defense meaning they leave gaps behind the ruck. the blues explioted this in a big way against All three Aussie teams.

The lack of good forward play is one reason I have put money on the Wannabe's not making it passed pool play at the World cup. With the Arggies and Irish playing the forward game. something will have to change big time for the Wannabies to match it.

: Oracle
Legend, there are something like 50 Australian players plying their trade in Europe at the moment. A lot of these players are quite young. The 4th side would be made up of these players, the young players in the Sydney and Brisbane Club comps, and maybe a couple of league recruits.
Don't count on there being a fourth Aussie team. When the new deal is signed with News, the ONLY way the the NZRFU will allow the ARU an extra team is if they don't ask for a bigger cut of the money. Since that wanker O'Neil (it must be something in the last name) wants a forth team so he can get more money from the deal.
Not to mention that News have already gone on record saying that 12 teams suits them fine and I know that the NZRFU will never cut a team and I doubt the yarpies will either it leaves a big problem.

 

[imported_Oracle]

Beowolf,
For the last few years the Aussies have been playing a bastardisation of League commiting only a couple of players to each breakdown and having a de-facto play the ball. Boring but effective. The Crusadersplay a little like that as well.

I think the Brumbies and the Crusaders are the biggest users of this tactic, although I don't agree with you to the extent that the ruck has become ade-facto play the ball. I think now the teams are just a little bit smarter about which rucks they commit their forwards to.

In defense if a side can relatively isolate a player then obviously they will commit many players to the ruck to push over the tackled player and gain possession, on the other hand if the opposition arerunning straight up the middle with a lot of support behind them the defensive team will not commit many players to the tackle as a turnover would be very unlikely (although they still need at least two players on either side of the tackle to defend the pick and drive), while the increased amount of players at the ruck would leave gaps out wide. I think what the Blues are doing well is getting quick ball (although the Brumbies did slow down the tackle very well for the first 15 mins of the game and that's where the Blues didn't look all that flash) this enables them to exploit the gaps that will inevitably be in the middle of the park as the defensive men that should be on either side of the ruck are not there yet, they have to come right around from their side of the field and come through the gate. By this time the Blues forwards have picked up the ball and driven another 10 metres forward. If the Brumbies had committed more men to the tackle in these times the Blues would have spun it wide and scored anyway.

The main problem the Brumbies had was their inability to keep the ball in attack, partially due to good work at the breakdown from the Blues but IMO mainly because of the weather. I think in dry weather the Brumbies would have been able to keep possession, and when they're on song they are the fastest recyclers of the ball in the competition, they would have exploited the Blues just as the Blues exploited them last night. I think the Blues won because they had the ability to play their natural game in the wet. The Brumbies tried, but they just couldn't do it. All credit to the Blues though they were very good.

I love all this stuff though. There's so many seemingly insignificant facets of the game that teams have to be good at to win. The balance of certain facets of the game (e.g the amount of players to commit to the tackle)teams must have is also crucial to a successfull team. Gotta love it.....

The lack of good forward play is one reason I have put money on the Wannabe's not making it passed pool play at the World cup

LOL, I hope you haven't put too much on it! I think our front row is fairly weak around the field but other than that we'll be ready to face your boys in the semi finals!

Not to mention that News have already gone on record saying that 12 teams suits them fine

They don't mind if it stays the same, but I guarentee they'd prefer a 4th Australian teams along with a 13 or 14 team comp.

 

[Marcus]

"It will be interesting to watch what happens to the way Union is played in Australia with this huge League influence going into the game." - Roopy

Well so far they haven'tmade us any better or worse.

I don't know whether getting league recruits will help the game or not. In fact I don't think it does much at all. The benefit is of course the publicity, and Wendell was a big grab. He hasn't performed as well as I thought he would in union, and I think the ARU will be a bit more hesitant before shelling out the half a million or so for another Wendell.

It will be interesting to see after the world cup and the actions that the ARU will take. I truly doubt they will target anymore big name league players, but maybe a few medium range players. Then again they just might invest in grassroots and forget about chasing converts. The one thing that I have noticed is that both league and union are truly different games. Many people say they are getting closer and closer, but thats not true, its still different and will stay that way.

After the world cup a lot of aussie players will go overseas. Will leave gaps in the Super 12 sides, but it will just mean opportunities for younger guys coming through. Will be tough in 2004, but the objective will be again to have a good side by the time the next world cup comes around in 2007.


"Don't count on there being a fourth Aussie team. When the new deal is signed with News, the ONLY way the the NZRFU will allow the ARU an extra team is if they don't ask for a bigger cut of the money. Since that wanker O'Neil (it must be something in the last name) wants a forth team so he can get more money from the deal." - Beowolf

News might not be the only one that gets into the act. The possibility of free to air TV stations getting some games it there.

Plus, the ARU wants another side not for the money, but to expand rugby around Australia. Perth or a Melbourne would be a big boost for the game. The support for rugby in those cities in quite strong, and they could easily attract 18,000+ crowds to games.

"Not to mention that News have already gone on record saying that 12 teams suits them fine and I know that the NZRFU will never cut a team and I doubt the yarpies will either it leaves a big problem." - Beowolf

It will be a Super 14 in 2006, no doubt. All it will do is extent the season to 15 weeks, just 1 week more than now.

South Africa are interested in another side, the ARU want another one, and NZ will be in a party pooper mode. The new contract will likely be much bigger, if another 2 extra sides comes in. Free State fans will get their own team, either Melbourne or Perth will get the nod, and the winner will be rugby in the end.

 

[legend]

Marcus, sorry to burst your bubble but television contracts will get smaller next time round and this will be for every sport, not just RU.

As for the FTA networks shelling out to support a fourth side. Don't bet on it. I ead that channel seven have scrapped coverage of the S12 altogether and with nine committed to AFL and NRL and ten to AFL and motorsport, I can guarantee you Kerry Stokes will not shell out a cent to support a S12 side that will be in direct competition with the AFL in either Melbourne or Perth. Putting it simply, Rugby doesn't rate on TV, least of all S12. The odd Bledisloe may do ok but they are well behind the NRL and AFL so O'Neill has a big job on his hands just to convince a network that Rugby is worth picking up because at the moment, no one is showing any interest and this is the year of the RWC.

Rugby is in trouble IMO, the mass exodus of players will halt any moves for expansion well beyond 2006 and I doubt the Aussies will go close to winning the RWC. NZ, France, Ireland and England are all ahead of Australia at the moment with Argentina andSouth Africanot far behind.

Rugby won't die, it will just take it's place in the market as a niche sport that doesn't appeal to the masses.

 

[imported_Oracle]

Legend, the ARU will have a windfall of close, if not over $100 million by the end of this year, including the revenue from the world cup.

They will not waste this money. Mark my words, the money will be used to expand the game; increasemarketing, fund junior development programs, fund a national club competition and a 4th super 12 side and invest for the future.

The television contracts will be smaller, but from the money the ARU will make THIS year it shouldn't be too harmful to them, while the sponsorship in rugby union has increasedimmensly every year sincethe game wentpro. Althoughtherise will undoubtedly begin toflatten in the future, at the moment it is still growinghealthilyand looks like it will continue.

The Super 12 would rate if it was showed live on free to air, with a delayed coverage on fox. A game like NSW v ACT or QLD would be very successfull for channel 7 or anyother channel that showed it, especially if they were played on a Friday night, I think Saturday night hurts its ratings (although I definately would prefer big crowds to high ratings, if I could only get one of the two)

I think that's one reason why the big league games like origin and the kangaroo testsmay get huge tv ratings but not sell out. I bet if they played the state of origin on Saturday nights instead of Wednesday or Tests on a saturday instead of a Friday they'd all get sold out but their viewing numbers wouldn't be as high.

I'd think it would be embarrassing forthe Rugby League ifthe showpiece of the game is seen by millions of people with empty seats in the background. Even if the ratings are huge, people who do not know much about the game will perceive the event not to be as big as its been hyped up to be if they see its not sold out.

Anyway, I guess they're are pros and cons on both sides.

Also Legend, I dont think its fair to say Ireland are in front of Australia. They are improving and definately have the ability to upset any side in the world on a good day but Australia are just a superior side. They beat a wallaby side that weren't at full strength, at their home ground, in the freezing cold when it was raining and they didn't exactly flog us either.

In Australia we'll beat them by 20 (unless theytake a dose of that luck the Irish have on occasion)

BTW, the mass exodus of players? There'll be like6 or 7 top playersat the most.
We may struggle in 2004, 2005 but as Markus said we'll be working towards 2007.

The Wallabies need to blood some of the younger guys anyway.The teams getting a little old and stale now.

 

This message has been deleted by the author.

 

[CanadianSteve]

Well, how does this thread look in retrospect? Aussie union has not fallen too far, or lost too many players has it? And the influx of league players seems to have slowed.

I liked looking back over this thread and reading posters like Marcus, Beowulf, and Oracle, who were real union experts (IMO). I miss the league vs. union battles that used to go on here, mostly with a bunch of members ganging up on Marcus.

 

[bender]

Looking around the message boards, I think you will find the League vs Union debate is a little overemphasised on both message boards (where most fans are hardcore and not casual) and in the media. The signing of high profile players from either code are of little effect to the other. Wendell and lote created some interest for league fans but ultimately had little effect on the popularity of the sport.

The world cup brought a lot of interest to union for a short period of time, and it was sold as an event, but it also meant that a lot of people realised that it was not the World game it had been portraying in the media. The super 12s when it first came on the scene was quite big but it has been dwindling in main stream interest and now that it is only on Foxsports. I think you will find that Union has an awful lot of die hard supporters, particularly those who came through universities but they do not have many mainstream casual supporters. I think this is because of the way they make their code almost a way of life and an exclusive club as much about socialising than anything else. Even their first division sides play in a comp that is more social than competive. League fans see this as a weakness but it is in fact their strength and this socialisation culture particularly through educational institutionsis what helped union spread internationally (forming an early world cup also helped enormously). Personally I think that union would be best off forgettingcompletely about paying high profile league players and returnedto their amateur roots (or at least semi amateur) roots, the players probably do need some money. I find that the more professionalised the game becomes the less attractive it becomes (it turns into penalty feasts and istoo structured).

The problem Union has, is that if the game is to attract more mainstream interest, it needs media coverage. They get very little coverage, which is the main reason why they need to piggy back off the league name and player signings just to increase their media coverage. To be honest, half the time they make bad comments about league it is only just to get them some publicity anyway. League on the other hand get coverage for anything andeverything. So much so, that they are usually defending media beatups. They get lots of bad publicity for things, but i really dont think most of their fans realise just what a blessing it is.

 

[CanadianSteve]

That's a good summary, Bender, thanks. I must say I'm always interested in the RL-RU rivalry. That's what led me to this site in the first place - I was watching rugby on TV, and started looking for it on the net, and somehow became interested in the fact that there was this "other" code out there I didn't know about. And now I do like to see league players jump to union because then I can see them play.

But, I see thatJoey Johns has decided to stay in RL. Do you think he could have been great in union if he had signed at this stage of his career?

 

[bender]

I dont know enough about the subtle differences of the game to say for sure one way or the other.

In rugby League, I consider that Johns is best described as being brilliant but erratic. He will do 5 brillian things and then make a simple error or two. I actually wonder whether he would have been as effective under the old 5 m rules, when ball security was soimportant.

In rugby union, I am not sure how his style would fit into the game. The basic errors he makes would be less important in union (i think) as it doesnt seem uncommon for union sides to make a few errors. He wouldnt get the ball as often as he would in a league game, but he would still produce his 4 or 5 gems per game, which i think the would have people raving about how good he is. If he came across, like wendall, he would almost certainly get a chance to play for the Wallabies in the world cup, and i could see him really carving them up against the minor sides who are very poor in comparison to the opposition he is used to playing for.

I think i would back Andrew Johns to be a sensation at union, unless he suffered the Garrick Morgan problem of getting injured.

 

[CanadianSteve]

Interesting to look back at some of the 2 year old posts here about the state of the Wallabies in light of their current downturn.