The League Media

[Blue]

The above is a good example of how poor the quality of arguments are becoming in this thread.

Or perhaps how this thread has always been.

Person A (this person likes union, doesn't like league or NFL) - Says RL is boring it is becoming like NFL (which he also believes is boring)

Person B (This person doesn't like league but likes union and NFL) - Disagrees, from his perspective league is nothing like NFL.

.

Person c: The person who understand the NFL and League and makes an argument over the utterly absurd comparison between the NFL and League.

Like or dislike has nothing to do with my argument.

To draw parallels between NRL and NFL is simply misguided.

I am sorry I don't like League. I grew up with Union. I have no preconceived ideas. I missed out on the Aussie class divide and saw my first league game live at Brookie Oval at the ripe old age of 33 (and have been to a few games over the years). I found the crowd refined when compared the the East stand of Loftus Versfeld, one of the most feral places you will ever witness. I formed my opinion on what I saw in front of me. It's just a very dumbed down sport. But if you like it I have no problem with it. I don't judge people who like it. Why does it always have to come down to fucking class bullshit with people who like league? I have this argument all the time with guys who train at my gym. They run out of technical arguments over league vs Union and start attacking the people who like Union when you point out to them the scums, their vanilla argument, no longer wastes the time it used to.


Class has nothing to do with my argument. You don't know me, you don't know what I think or don't think other than the facts that I don't like a particular sport.

Spare me the pigeonholing, class warfare and especially the moral high horse.

This is a forum. People have different opinions. They voice them. As long as we play the ball. Not the man.

 

[louie]

Papabear each of those games you mention as simple all have dramatically different styles and tactics employed, RL doesn't.

 

[dru]

I don't know what this means.

I have followed NFL for 25 years and I have played it. As much morphing as League could ever do I fail to see how it could in any shape or form resemble the NFL, for many reasons. In fact the very notion I find laughable but it doesn't top league hacks making up stories about it.

One such reason? The NFL is highly, highly technical and complex. League? It's fucking stupid beyond description. It's like a blunt instrument. What can you do with a blunt instrument? Bludgeon stuff. Okay, threaten a little from time to time and then bludgeon anyway.

There is one comparison point and one only and that is that you are guaranteed the ball for a certain number of plays. That is also where similarities end with the NFL.

it wasn't meant to be deep and meaningful. I just don't see League surviving as much more than a global sporting side issue.

Grid Iron has similar roots to Rugby imo. Starting from an early version of Association Football which allowed picking up the ball. Restart was an issue, in one we got the scrum, the other the snap. The big difference really at that point is allowing a forward pass.

Some NFL to NRL similarities are:
1. Passing gone in NFL, going in NRL.
2. Kicking not passes, kicks in play rather than set piece. But similar purpose.
3. NFL may be intensively complex, but decisions are made by the coach, play makers on the field not wanted. Sounds like league to me.
4. Limited plays.

Sure, "morphing into NFL" is a stretch of imagination. But I don't think League will ever again look like Rugby.

As it turns out I quite enjoy NFL and can't stand league. But don't have a lot of time for either as Rugby satisfies my sport needs.

 

[papabear]

​

Papabear each of those games you mention as simple all have dramatically different styles and tactics employed, RL doesn't​

​

Rugby League has dramatically different styles and tactics as well.​

Generally speaking all sports will all look the same same to someone who doesn't understand what the teams are trying to do.​

 

[Antony]

The above is a good example of how poor the quality of arguments are becoming in this thread.

Or perhaps how this thread has always been.

Person A (this person likes union, doesn't like league or NFL) - Says RL is boring it is becoming like NFL (which he also believes is boring)

Person B (This person doesn't like league but likes union and NFL) - Disagrees, from his perspective league is nothing like NFL.

Now the arguments about structure. All modern sporting teams analyse opponents weaknesses using stats and attack the oppositions weakest points and try to cover up their own weaknesses.

A rugby union team that cant run very fast, can't catch or pass, will not try and get around or through a team but simply over the top.

Same with a rugby league team.

Same with an NFL team.

For the record in my opinion rugby league isn't stupid beyond description. It is a game with simple rules but that doesn't make it stupid. IMO that's opens the game up a bit more allowing for more creativity from the players themselves (obviously whether they choose to use that creativity is up to them).

For example other games with relatively simple rules.
- soccer
- golf
- basketball
- chess
- tennis

The list goes on and on and on.

(you can edit the next bit, but honestly the point needs to be made)

Without generalising if you think you are better then the people around you, if you believe you come from a social class above your fellow men, if you enjoy killing another blokes chicken, or making another man eat pooo off your shoe because hes a bit different from you (or in your own min below you), then obviously rugby league is not the game for you.

What a crazy post.

How do you go from "people here think league is simple" to "if you believe you come from a social class above your fellow men, if you enjoy killing another blokes chicken, or making another man eat pooo off your shoe... then obviously rugby league is not the game for you"?

Honestly, I'm curious about the mechanics of that segue.

There are people here who don't like league (it is a forum dedicated to a different sport, so that's always going to happen) and there are people here who use words like 'mungo', which always gives me the shits. But to try to argue that league has some monopoly on egalitarianism is as stupid as when union fans try to argue that rugby has some monopoly on sportsmanship.

 

[papabear]

Person c: The person who understand the NFL and League and makes an argument over the utterly absurd comparison between the NFL and League.

Like or dislike has nothing to do with my argument.

To draw parallels between NRL and NFL is simply misguided.

I am sorry I don't like League. I grew up with Union. I have no preconceived ideas. I missed out on the Aussie class divide and saw my first league game live at Brookie Oval at the ripe old age of 33 (and have been to a few games over the years). I found the crowd refined when compared the the East stand of Loftus Versfeld, one of the most feral places you will ever witness. I formed my opinion on what I saw in front of me. It's just a very dumbed down sport. But if you like it I have no problem with it. I don't judge people who like it. Why does it always have to come down to fucking class bullshit with people who like league? I have this argument all the time with guys who train at my gym. They run out of technical arguments over league vs Union and start attacking the people who like Union when you point out to them the scums, their vanilla argument, no longer wastes the time it used to.


Class has nothing to do with my argument. You don't know me, you don't know what I think or don't think other than the facts that I don't like a particular sport.

Spare me the pigeonholing, class warfare and especially the moral high horse.

This is a forum. People have different opinions. They voice them. As long as we play the ball. Not the man.

Everyone loves to ride the moral high horse. You are right I do not know you, nor do I know what you think. I never said I do? Perhaps I hit a nerve, or perhaps something else is going on?

With respect you are more then welcome to not like league, just like I am welcome to like it.

However if you are going to refer to it as a game that is stupid beyond comprehension then you have already dropped the bar so low in terms of logical argument to make your point, then riding on the moral class horse is nothing compared to where you have gone.

As for league verse union threads, in my opinion its a waste of time, I am just on this thread to defend league. It actually gives thread a bit more flavour then a dump on league fest filled with mungo pictures, that would get boring after a while.

Generally speaking people either like one or the other, or they like them both no amount of internet convincing is going to change that.

But when people post stuff that is a bit far gone, like your previous post, then I am going to call you on it.

 

[papabear]

Also I think League saw positive attacking sides like the cowboys get results with more penalties and in general a more stamping out of negative play from the refs.

Union also is seeing this shift with the waratahs in 2014 and SH owning the SF of the recent WC.

 

[Pfitzy]

​

Rugby League has dramatically different styles and tactics as well.​

Generally speaking all sports will all look the same same to someone who doesn't understand what the teams are trying to do.​

It HAS them, but it doesn't often USE them. There are intricacies to league that sometimes can only be explained by such luminaries as Peter Sterling, but to the onlooker it is roughly the same technical readout for every player: around 6 feet tall, around 100kg, can catch and run. Some of the tactics are designed to target a weak side, or a particular player.

But by and large, the NRL is more homogenous that it ever has been - truck it up as far as you can for 4 or 5 tackles, followed by a bit of variation on the last or second-last depending on field position. Teams are punished for mistakes like any sport, but they are more often rewarded for attrition in the NRL at least. Ball playing forwards are nearly a thing of the past, except for the "hooker" who will occasionally chime in but really its at 6 and 7 where the action happens, and then not always.

The Tigers won their last premiership because Benji Marshall performed playmaking duties in the first few tackles rather than just waiting. Defences didn't know what to do about it because everyone had started to play high-percentage footy.

But coaching positions are won or lost on results, not ambition. The risks are taken out as much as possible, the playmaking restricted to one or two players, and the product - while still pleasing to its target audience - hasn't had a revolution in over a decade.

Rugby is much the same at the higher levels which is why many teams won't play with risk; they put "not-losing" ahead of winning.

Individual taste will determine a lot of what you find appealing. But to any outsider looking in, you can't really make any argument that League - while still played at a very high athletic level - is the most creative sport going.

 

[papabear]

What a crazy post.

How do you go from "people here think league is simple" to "if you believe you come from a social class above your fellow men, if you enjoy killing another blokes chicken, or making another man eat pooo off your shoe. then obviously rugby league is not the game for you"?

Honestly, I'm curious about the mechanics of that segue.

There are people here who don't like league (it is a forum dedicated to a different sport, so that's always going to happen) and there are people here who use words like 'mungo', which always gives me the shits. But to try to argue that league has some monopoly on egalitarianism is as stupid as when union fans try to argue that rugby has some monopoly on sportsmanship.

Rugby League certainly doesn't have a monopoly on egalitarianism.

Though, it tends to have a certain fairness about it. A certain fairness that I thought might be able to provoke something from blu, and it certainly achieved that.

 

[Pfitzy]

Also I think League saw positive attacking sides like the cowboys get results with more penalties and in general a more stamping out of negative play from the refs.

This to me is the key thing in the NRL - they really need to keep the defensive side honest to allow more open field play. Too much post-tackle fucking around allowed by the whistle men.

If you did that, it would open up playmaking on the second or third tackle, and allow bigger territory gains while you were at it. Players would be forced to upskill a bit more and the backs would actually get involved on the first couple of phases instead of just being kick-returners.

 

[papabear]

Rugby is much the same at the higher levels which is why many teams won't play with risk; they put "not-losing" ahead of winning.

Individual taste will determine a lot of what you find appealing. But to any outsider looking in, you can't really make any argument that League - while still played at a very high athletic level - isn't the most creative sport going.

It depends on the game on the day and the patience of one you are trying to convince as to how your argument is received. Same with any sport.

That said I don't really care for converting people, I watch all sports and enjoy most of them, I am not here to tell people what is or isn't to their taste. Again I am just defending rugby league against a tirade of unwarranted accusations in this thread.

 

[Blue]

3. NFL may be intensively complex, but decisions are made by the coach, play makers on the field not wanted. Sounds like league to me.

For vastly different reasons.

 

[Iluvmyfooty]

Isn't there a seperate forum on why I hate that other game. Don't see too much talk lately about the media. Maybe when big Sammie comes back the talk about league media will return

 

[dru]

For vastly different reasons.

Really?

 

[RunnerGunner]

The similarities between league and AF are the limited tackles. They are desperate to be compared to AF as AF being confined to the US (mainly) gives more credence to their own competition.

League fans like to slag off contested scrums (why they do when they have the ridiculous charade of uncontested ones miffs me), the NFL still has the close quarters line of scrimmage and blocking which is probably more subjective than a rugby scrum in terms of reffing and just as complex.

Then you come to body shapes, RL body shapes have gradually become more linear whilst AF has remained varied and distinct. This is because of the different complex requirements of a position. Rugby has seen a convergence in body shapes but it is still far more distinct than rugby league.

AF maintains the 3 points for the field goal option whist league has it at one point. In the NFL "going for it" on 4th down is irregular, usually happening when you are right on the line or the game is finishing up ("hail Mary"). League has embraced the roll the dice on every last tackle within the oppositions half. As a result we see in every game nearly a couple of tries which are scored off up and unders or grubbers where the defense mess up (i.e. the players going up like volley ball players, the ball bouncing around and there being a try). This creates a necessary excitement in rugby league as the general build up is just the same old same old. The NFL maintains the integrity of the 3 point field goal and going for it in extreme situations.

 

[mxyzptlk]

Isn't there a seperate forum on why I hate that other game. Don't see too much talk lately about the media. Maybe when big Sammie comes back the talk about league media will return

That was called "Rugby League Really Gives Me The Shits," but I think it's been lying fallow for some time now.

 

[Braveheart81]

There seems to be a lot of posts making sweeping statements about the NFL from people who clearly don't watch it.

 

[Strewthcobber]

There seems to be a lot of posts making sweeping statements about the NFL from people who clearly don't watch it.

Amen to that.
No playmakers on the field!

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk

 

[papabear]

Bath captain Stuart Hooper allegedly told Sam Burgess not to come in and say goodbye to the team.

Sounds like a top bloke .

 

[Blue]

Really?

Do you have any clue whatsoever of the concepts of the playbook and play calling? From your previous comment, I think not.