Top ten things Rugby owes to league

[ANTiLAG]

1908 did point out though that the Union ball changed to a more rounded shape in the 70's which made it easier to kick. Thus why those union players were able to achieve a higher success rate faster than league players were able to. Obviously technique is part of that equation as well, but as pointed out, around the corner kickers have existed for quite some time previous to the 80's. Just not as common.

Yes he does Dogs - but this fails to explain why Ridge was so far ahead of League players using a League ball when he converted in 1980. Thus, its nothing more than a red herring. Common Sense and logic just shows that union kickers were generally light years ahead of league kickers as evidenced by using the same ball and playing the same game. It was true for the UK too as evidenced by Botica. Why would RL source as many union goal kickers as they could eg Crossan, when the balls were different? Because Union kickers could kick a League ball better than a League player could. Simple as that. Union kicking coaches came in and before you know it Leaguies were as good with Taylor J and Johns A becomming quite skilful and a dept in the 90's.

Also refer the point I make about arc kicking from around the corner as opposed to kicking straight from around the corner.

 

[Dogs Of War]

Yes he does Dogs - but this fails to explain why Ridge was so far ahead of League players using a League ball when he converted in 1980.

Ridge converted in 1990 to league. he played 2 seasons of top level rugby union previously. Earlier in his career he kicked at something like 75%, improving as time when on (80.22% career), which is to be expected as league had got more professional during the 1990's when it went full time professional (as opposed to the part time status of the 1980's). Thus he had more time to put the practice in, and many other players at this time converted to the around the corner technique which with the synthetic balls being used, was much more accurate technique to use as now you didn't need to rely on the power as much.

 

[RL1908]

I can see the argument that rl1908 is trying to make but it just does not hold for two reasons. Firstly, Union already had 80% standards without tees, synthetic balls, and professionalism throughout the 80's. Argentina (Porta), South Africa (Botha), NZ (Fox), Aus (Lynagh), Eng (Andrew), Scotland (Hastings), to name but a few. ANd remeber in Union they take much harder penalty kicks from further out etc. League was behind the times.

Ridge showed the worth of accurate goal kicking (not for penalities as union) but just to turn 4 into 6 within the NSWRL. Ridge blew league people away in 1990. You have to remember the guy had never kicked for any of his rugby teams because he was not good enough for union! It caught on and there was a rush for top clubs to get union kickers exemplified by Crossan, Schuster, Halligan AND to get union trainers to teach people goal kicking. From 1991 onwards the standard of NSWRL and English League kicking greatly improved. Terry Matterson and Mal were the last two toe hackers I remember. But even the likes of Brandy and Taylor were assisted by the extra training from union kickers comming in and teaching. The NSWRL and English league eventually raised their standards to union levels by about the end of the 90's.

The round the corner kickers in League had up until Ridge still only kicked the ball straight. Ridge/Halligan et al taught people to have an arc in the kick for greater control and accuracy. Now - its common place./

Tee's, balls, professionalism irrelevant. Goal kicking just was not highly valued until Ridge awed people in 1990. Suddenly 60% was not good enough. One year in the mid 80's when Parra won - Cronin's season goal kicking average was 45%! Unheard of today and not at all acceptable by NPC (Union) standards at the same time.

The revolution of league goal kicking from the start of 1990 to the end of the 90's matches that done by union a decade earlier. It makes sense union to do it first - 3 point penalties and often in the 80's games were merely a penalty shoot out. More so than today.

Behind the times? Compared to what? The rugby codes are different games, with different priorities. One treasures penalty goals, one doesn't.

As you point out, Parra won the premiership with Cronin as kicker - what difference would it have made if he was kicking at a higher success rate?

Well before Ridge's arrival Ross Conlon played a Test match purely because of his goal kicking, including long range goals. Mike Eden was banging them over (with a curve) with either foot from the touchline.

 

[RL1908]

Mike Eden's arrival in 1980 (scroll to the left to see pics as well)
A Reliable Goal-kicker Can Be One Of The Greates Assets Of A Rugby …
Sydney Morning Herald - Google News Archive - Mar 6, 1980

Golden Boot Of Conlon Downs Jets .
Sydney Morning Herald - Google News Archive - Apr 11, 1983

 

[ANTiLAG]

Ridge converted in 1990 to league.

Obviously a typo - refer my other posts.

he played 2 seasons of top level rugby union previously. Earlier in his career he kicked at something like 75%, improving as time when on (80.22% career),

Where you getting this from - HE NEVER KICKED FOR AUCKLAND OR AB's - refer Grant Fox.
Improved to 80%? Hah he kicked 75% in his first season of league and was miles clear of the next best regular kicker. He kicked at 82% the next year. You have to remember 1990 was his first year of goal kicking - he was not a regular kicker in union at all.

http://stats.rleague.com/rl/scorers/1990_sc.html

which is to be expected as league had got more professional during the 1990's when it went full time professional (as opposed to the part time status of the 1980's).

Or as he became a regular kicker... But the problem with your argument is that in 1992 he reverted back to 75%. He was always fluctuating around 75-83% (one season 87% but he kicked a lot less goals that year), there was no steady improvement for him personally so your professionalism argument is crap and is not supported by the facts. Halligan fluctuated too kicking at only 70% in 95.

The professionalism argument just does not hold because UNION WAS AMMATEUR and the Union boys WERE ALREADY KICKING HIGH NUMBERS. THe different ball does not matter because the union guys were better than league guys at kicking a league ball. the facts are plain and obvious to see.

Seriously, look at the 92 season
http://stats.rleague.com/rl/scorers/1992_sc.html

Of the kickers to kick more than 50 goals and average over 72% accuracy are all union converts.

Halligan, Crossan, Schuster, Leeds, Ridge.... all unionites. The standards had been changed by the imposition of Ridge in 1990 - so when Taylor, Alexander and Girdler all then had to practice, get union trainers and league slowly caught up to union. But 1990-92 all the press, all the fans, everything was about "wow these union guys can kick goals".

Thus he had more time to put the practice in, and many other players at this time converted to the around the corner technique which with the synthetic balls being used, was much more accurate technique to use as now you didn't need to rely on the power as much.

Well Halligan was a seasoned pro in 95 and a shocking year with the boot. Your claims and arguments are not supported by the facts. Clearly union kickers when they transferred wer emuch better than league kickers. The only league kicker that got close to Halligan, Ridge, Botica et al was Jason Taylor in the 90's. With a union kicking coach. Those are facts. But this bollocks that people transferred to round th ecorner because they changed the ball. What a load of crap. People were round the cornering with leather balls and out kicking the toe hackers previously. Seriously, you're just making stuff up now. Union players were kicking during ammateur at high accuracy, transferring to league and out kicking league players. Its clear for all to see - why can you not see it?

There was a rush for clubs to get Union kicking coaches or a union goal kicker in the early 90's. Thats a fact too.

 

[ANTiLAG]

Mike Eden's arrival in 1980 (scroll to the left to see pics as well)
A Reliable Goal-kicker Can Be One Of The Greates Assets Of A Rugby …
Sydney Morning Herald - Google News Archive - Mar 6, 1980

Was not sustained. Clearly by the end of the 80's it was forgotten about. The Ridge Halligan revolution has left its mark on goal kicking standards today in League.

Golden Boot Of Conlon Downs Jets .
Sydney Morning Herald - Google News Archive - Apr 11, 1983

Refer above.

 

[ANTiLAG]

Behind the times? Compared to what? The rugby codes are different games, with different priorities. One treasures penalty goals, one doesn't.

As you point out, Parra won the premiership with Cronin as kicker - what difference would it have made if he was kicking at a higher success rate?

Well before Ridge's arrival Ross Conlon played a Test match purely because of his goal kicking, including long range goals. Mike Eden was banging them over (with a curve) with either foot from the touchline.

Your argument just does not hold that "goal kikcing would have improved in both codes in the 90's due to tees, synthetic balls and tees". Its fallacious. Union kicking became accurate in the late 70's and throughout the 80's. League had to wait until the 90's - clearly kickstarted by Ridge, Halligan, Crossan and Schuster to name but a few.

 

[ANTiLAG]

Ridge converted in 1990 to league. he played 2 seasons of top level rugby union previously. Earlier in his career he kicked at something like 75%, improving as time when on (80.22% career), which is to be expected as league had got more professional during the 1990's when it went full time professional (as opposed to the part time status of the 1980's). Thus he had more time to put the practice in, and many other players at this time converted to the around the corner technique which with the synthetic balls being used, was much more accurate technique to use as now you didn't need to rely on the power as much.

You're talking about a 5% improvement? LOL. You have clearly missed the point.

Look at the goal kicking stats of a year such as 89/90 and compare them to 99 for all players.

See the MASSIVE RISE IN Goal kicking accuracy?

http://stats.rleague.com/rl/scorers/1989_sc.html

http://stats.rleague.com/rl/scorers/1990_sc.html -> Reidge debuts - light years ahead of other kickers....


AND

http://stats.rleague.com/rl/scorers/1999_sc.htmlhttp://stats.rleague.com/rl/scorers/2000_sc.html

League was professional before - but after Ridge/Halligan demand for accurate goal kickers increased. Their worth was more valued and kicking at 55-60% was no longer acceptable. 70% minimum became the new standard...

Nothing to do with tees, ball changes, or professionalism or any of the other crap rl1908 argues.

 

[ANTiLAG]

Well before Ridge's arrival Ross Conlon played a Test match purely because of his goal kicking, including long range goals. Mike Eden was banging them over (with a curve) with either foot from the touchline.

After Ridge's retirement there were no toe hackers.

 

[Parra]

Mike Eden's arrival in 1980 (scroll to the left to see pics as well)
A Reliable Goal-kicker Can Be One Of The Greates Assets Of A Rugby …
Sydney Morning Herald - Google News Archive - Mar 6, 1980

Golden Boot Of Conlon Downs Jets .
Sydney Morning Herald - Google News Archive - Apr 11, 1983

That sort of shoots down the "one treasures penalty goals, one doesn't" argument. Points are valuable and it seems more NRL matches are decided by a field goal that Super rugby matches. That's not a bad thing. The golden point rule has exacerbated this.

Regarding kicking tees, I thought it may have been one of your articles or posts that discussed the aspect that originally kicks had to be in contact with the ground - hence the drop goal and the mounding of earth to kick from. This was extended to sand, which would still be considered kicking off the ground.

Were rules altered at some point to allow kicking from tees? Or are these now considered an extension of the ground. Interesting that the code that has varied the greatest from the original game - gridiron, still has conversions and field goal attempts from a ball that must be in contact with the field. Even though the field itself may be artificial.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

That sort of shoots down the "one treasures penalty goals, one doesn't" argument.

One game in 1983 shoots down the argument?

As against the penalty goal-fest that Union is now?

How many super 14 games this season didn't have a penalty goal?

How many rounds of the NRL season would be needed to match that number?

1? 2?

 

[Parra]

Penalty goals are important in both codes. Being worth 3 points makes each goal more valuable in union. Based on that, you'd expect to see a lot more field goals in union than you do. Someone will come along and shoot the lights out before that rule is changed.

You'll see some Aussie sides go all match without kicking one - but that wont be for lack of trying.

 

[RL1908]

Was not sustained. Clearly by the end of the 80's it was forgotten about. The Ridge Halligan revolution has left its mark on goal kicking standards today in League.

Make your mind up. One moment you're looking for innovators, the next they don't count unless they cause an immediate revolution.

It's ridiculous to assert that that fulltime professionalism, 21st century ball design and kicking tees hasn't raised the standard of goal kicking in both codes.

 

[Parra]

Playing surfaces as well, particularly in the wet.

 

[RL1908]

That sort of shoots down the "one treasures penalty goals, one doesn't" argument.

Until this year's rule tweaking, it's been a well established tactic in RU to work the ball into your opponent's end of the field with goal kicking range, simply in the proven belief that sooner or later the referee will give a penalty your way. I don't see that happening in RL since the limited tackle era began (at least).

Regarding kicking tees, I thought it may have been one of your articles or posts that discussed the aspect that originally kicks had to be in contact with the ground - hence the drop goal and the mounding of earth to kick from. This was extended to sand, which would still be considered kicking off the ground.

Were rules altered at some point to allow kicking from tees? Or are these now considered an extension of the ground. Interesting that the code that has varied the greatest from the original game - gridiron, still has conversions and field goal attempts from a ball that must be in contact with the field. Even though the field itself may be artificial.

Yes, I recall saying something along those lines. A punt kicked goal doesn't count in rugby - the ball has to have risen from the ground (drop kick, place kick, or the original soccer-style "field goal").

The evolution towards the kicking tee begins with the original concept of the team mate placing/holding the ball (as is still in NFL) - the ball was "live" the moment the placer put the ball on the ground.

Then the rules were changed to allow the kicker to place the ball himself (a RL rule that RU subsequently copied) and to build a mound by use of the field itself, then sand/sawdust to save damage to the field & because many fields were too hard to build a mound or make a divot, then to a kicking tee.

Like most rule changes/evolutions, gradually over time the original intention/requirements of the rule have been lost or forgotten.

 

[RL1908]

I've completely lost what this debate was trying to resolve, but we do know that a very few round-the-corner kickers existed in RU (possibly NU) pre WW1. Willie Horne was the first to bring the concept into prominence just after WW2 in English RL. In the Nov 1962 edition of Rugby World Magazine (RU) there is a feature comparing the two styles (I don't have that). It gained wider popularity in both codes in the 1970s, spread by touring teams and tv coverage of the Four Nations (RU), plus John Gray in RL. In Aust many boys play soccer until crossing to the rugby codes in their mid teens, adopting a trait/path similar to Mike Eden (bringing soccer kicking to RL). By early 1984 toe-poking was not the favoured/coached style in RL junior comps in Sydney. Vagaries/preferences about how to place the ball for higher % success & distance emerged in NZ in the mid 1980s (Grant Fox) leading the current method.

Good luck trying to give one rugby code alone credit for all of that.

 

[Parra]

Until this year's rule tweaking, it's been a well established tactic in RU to work the ball into your opponent's end of the field with goal kicking range, simply in the proven belief that sooner or later the referee will give a penalty your way. I don't see that happening in RL since the limited tackle era began (at least).

That seems to be the way it is. There is nothing to compel a union side taking the kick option. Particularly as they now get the lineout throw after a penalty kick for touch.

I recall league teams taking the kick option more often in the 1980's, but as the contest for possession has been all but removed from the game running the ball entails much less risk than it used to.

Compare it to union, where you can lose possession at the first tackle, you can lose possession following a kick for touch. Add to that the goal being worth 3 points and it is the obvious option to take.

The NFL rules that award possession or fixed yardage are more consistent than the myriad of options/results presented in rugby codes penalties.

 

[manoj p]

That list of things league owes union is massive... Not.

 

[Hutty1986]

That list of things league owes union is massive... Not.

This suit is black, pause, not!

 

[ANTiLAG]

Make your mind up. One moment you're looking for innovators, the next they don't count unless they cause an immediate revolution.

It's ridiculous to assert that that fulltime professionalism, 21st century ball design and kicking tees hasn't raised the standard of goal kicking in both codes.

Im not asserting that ball design, kicking tees and profesisonalism has not MARGINALLY increased goal kicking percentages. I'm saying that revolutionary increase in percentages occurred in union in the late 70's early 80's before any of those things (tee, synthetic balls, professionalism) had occurred. Im saying it was round the corner kicking in an arc.

League had this revolution in the 90's. To support my argument I say look at the union kickers when they transferred over. I know you do not like this argument rl1908 as it is contrary to yours but it is supported by the stats. League despite being professional was slow to catch on to better, more accurate and widespread goal kicking methods. Ridge, Halligan, Botica, Crossan, Schuster & co (union kicking coaches) caused a mini revolution that spelt the end for the 'toe poke' and round the corner straight shooter with the rugby league ball. So ball differences between union and league is a redundant argument.

Kicking tees in rugby union were not introduced for accuracy but to stop time wasting. With development later they may have assisted accuracy - but when first implemented they dropped accuracy. Kickers at the time preferred the sand castle method.