Perhaps - I'd lost interest fairly early on and haven't watched it for years. However, I make it (1) the guy with the ball, (2) the guy from the other team he's going to run into and (3) the guy who's going to collect the heel. (4) if you count the one that (3) will pass to (perhaps), but then you start again.
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Wales vs Australia
Collapse
X
-
-
Malvolio is quite rightOriginally posted by benn0If you claim that there are only three players involved in any play in Rugby League you have not played it to a 'good club standard'
The point is that away from the runners and their direct support players the remainder of the team do not do anything in league except hold a line. In Union players are involved in clearing out rucks, driving mauls, lifting and blocking line outs, and pushing scrums. as soon as the ball goes to ground in league the play stops and restarts whereas in Union multiple players need to engage around the ball at any one time. These elements provide a dimension to Union that allows the sport to play people of differing sizes.Comment
-
Not true. For one the play doesn't actually stop when the tackled player goes to ground. Defensive lines are getting organised and the next attacking play has already been called. Just because a player isn't rolling about on the floor doesn't mean he isn't busting his balls to get in position for the next play. attacking plays are often called six tackles in advance so to suggest that the other players are doing nothing is pretty wide of the mark.Originally posted by ForumboreMalvolio is quite right
The point is that away from the runners and their direct support players the remainder of the team do not do anything in league except hold a line. In Union players are involved in clearing out rucks, driving mauls, lifting and blocking line outs, and pushing scrums. as soon as the ball goes to ground in league the play stops and restarts whereas in Union multiple players need to engage around the ball at any one time. These elements provide a dimension to Union that allows the sport to play people of differing sizes.
I played League to a fairly high standard and Union at an OK standard. There is no comparison in the concentration and fitness levels required. That is why Union can be played indefinitely and most League players have called it a day by their mid thirties.
Union has it's place - When played correctly it can be an entertaining enough sport. Its main problem is that half of the players don't even understand half of the decisions made by the ref.Comment
-
It's not them to be worried about. The Aussies ALWAYS play cack in the tri-nations group games and then spank everyone in the final. We may have beaten them the other day but I think they'll raise their game as always come final day (if we make it)Originally posted by wendigo100BTW Kiwis always peak between world cups.
As to union vs league and size matters: it doesn't. If you're small in league you can make darting runs. If you're small in union you can be a scrum half and make... darting runs. But the bigger guys in league would ultimately kick arse in union due to their all-round conditioning. Andy Sherridan may be big and powerful but he wouldn't last the pace against a league forward. Ditto Martin Johnstone. The union forwards are usually bigger but not as good athletes.
Comment
-
Originally posted by benn0Not true. For one the play doesn't actually stop when the tackled player goes to ground. Defensive lines are getting organised and the next attacking play has already been called. Just because a player isn't rolling about on the floor doesn't mean he isn't busting his balls to get in position for the next play. attacking plays are often called six tackles in advance so to suggest that the other players are doing nothing is pretty wide of the mark.
I played League to a fairly high standard and Union at an OK standard. There is no comparison in the concentration and fitness levels required. That is why Union can be played indefinitely and most League players have called it a day by their mid thirties.
Union has it's place - When played correctly it can be an entertaining enough sport. Its main problem is that half of the players don't even understand half of the decisions made by the ref.
In the same way that the fielding side of a cricket team is always involved in the game then yes you are right, but to sneer at Malvolio who was making a perfectly valid point was really rather pathetic.Comment
-
He didn't make a perfectly valid point.Originally posted by ForumboreIn the same way that the fielding side of a cricket team is always involved in the game then yes you are right, but to sneer at Malvolio who was making a perfectly valid point was really rather pathetic.Comment
-
That is almost complete bollocks. The bigger league players would be out of their depth in rucks mauls and the lineout and they would be life threatened if asked to scrummage. - No league player has successfully transformed to play in the scrum at Union (top level)Originally posted by DanTheManAs to union vs league and size matters: it doesn't. If you're small in league you can make darting runs. If you're small in union you can be a scrum half and make... darting runs. But the bigger guys in league would ultimately kick arse in union due to their all-round conditioning. Andy Sherridan may be big and powerful but he wouldn't last the pace against a league forward. Ditto Martin Johnstone. The union forwards are usually bigger but not as good athletes.

You are right about most Union forwards not being able to make the transformation to league (I would include Martin Johnson). Scott Quinnell was an outstanding league player. Sheridan is interesting in that he (in my view) could have been a good league player had he not been re-engineered into being a prop.
Rugby league requires players with basic all round athleticism and Union does not. In Union players are very much "positioned" whereas in league they are able to play anywhere (they all line up as backs)Comment
-
He made the point that there were very few players actively engaged at any one time in league which, depending upon your definition of engagement, is true. You argued that the remaining players were engaged by virtue of the fact that they were constantly "positioning" themselves which is also true. For you to then say he is talking crap shows what an idiot you are.Originally posted by benn0He didn't make a perfectly valid point.Comment
-
So you quote me as almost complete bollocks and then pretty much agree with me? Whatevers, I made the point and I stand by it. I don't think a league forward would be too far out of his depth in a top level scrum after some hard training. But what I was trying to say is that size wouldn't matter because once you've trained up a league forward he's still a better athlete than a union forward. This is a simple truth due to the fact that union hasn't been professional as long as league.
I like both codes. I really do. But I think union will benefit a lot more from league advancements than the opposite way around. League may a simpler game but the guys are biger and more skilled than the union fellas. Although they may have trouble with conversions...
Comment
-
You havent really quite grasped that the two games are different have you? League is for players who are athletes (can run fast and coordinate passing and catching) the other is also for athletes in some positions but not all. Try and think about this in a slightly different way, I know it is difficult and I know you like to see things with easy to understand benchmarks, but not all sports are set by the same rules.Originally posted by DanTheManSo you quote me as almost complete bollocks and then pretty much agree with me? Whatevers, I made the point and I stand by it. I don't think a league forward would be too far out of his depth in a top level scrum after some hard training. But what I was trying to say is that size wouldn't matter because once you've trained up a league forward he's still a better athlete than a union forward. This is a simple truth due to the fact that union hasn't been professional as long as league.
I like both codes. I really do. But I think union will benefit a lot more from league advancements than the opposite way around. League may a simpler game but the guys are biger and more skilled than the union fellas. Although they may have trouble with conversions...

Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers


Comment