terry j
Ron Walden (29)
has there been vitriolic hatred in this thread tho?? I have seen calm, considered criticism yes, but not sure about vitriolic hatred.
The way I kinda look at this thread is more an opportunity to 'get it off the chest' due, simply, to very little available alternative. So not much of a surprise to see these sentiments on a rugby forum. In many ways it is a backlash against what could be argued is a constant all powerful 'hatred' of union by most available outlets. Hatred might be a bit strong there, but I doubt you could make a cogent argument that union has anywhere the level of coverage it deserves. So from that angle the outlet here is understandable.
For example, in all my years of watching rugby I have yet to hear any sort of criticism from the commentators about league, indeed it often borders on outright appreciation, yet (especially when I consider how much league I watch) when watching a league game........
Much of this is of intense intellectual curiosity to me, bums on seats was one point raised that shows the elbow patch crowd have not got it right, yet when viewed against not only the massive exposure of league and the 'criminal' ignoring of union, we have the league guys bagging union at any available opportunity. Couple that then with the league fans getting nothing positive about union in the media, no wonder that we have the relative crowd levels.
Another point I wonder about, let's examine a possible casual exposure of the average league fan (bearing in mind the backdrop already outlined) to a game of union, I'd hazard it is likely to be a test match. But let's face it, a test match is a very different kettle of fish to the average Super Rugby game, or club game. For the very reasons that we would be engrossed (tight, hard fought, everything at stake)-due to it being an average test match-the uninformed league would walk away with his prejudices confirmed (but I'd also wager he did not try particularly hard to understand the different approach, more likely intending to confirm his existing ideas).
Unbeknownst to him tho, it could be that it more exposes the weakness of HIS code (to my way of thinking)..namely that as league is basically only played one way it would not even cross his mind that union can throw up vastly different games in style. How many tries just this last weekend were end to end stuff lasting minutes before finally a try was scored? All too often the 'quality' of a game is indicated by the (high) score. A very shallow view of sport methinks. Was it last year when we drew with the ABs there was an opinion piece in some newspaper...a union guy (jamie someone??) explained hoiw tight it was etc etc despite the low score, and of course a league guy basically saying how lame it was and low scoring blah blah. Anyway, what made me chuckle was that the next weekend was the RL GF, and IIRC it was rather low scoring hehe. Still, if we needed it, simply more evidence of a deep underlying bashing of union using whatever current available means to do so.
So no, he would only see 'test match' rugby, completely fail to grasp it anyway (and not willing to put the effort in) and not have any sort of reference in the media that would help him to (at least) view the game in and of itself. I mean to come to a decision on whether you like the game or not you at first have to be willing to watch it for itself. That is I think what would be the missing step.
So no, don't quite see any vitriolic hatred here, most points that have been raised seem to have been rational, thinking pints, have not seen blind unthinking lashing out at all.
The way I kinda look at this thread is more an opportunity to 'get it off the chest' due, simply, to very little available alternative. So not much of a surprise to see these sentiments on a rugby forum. In many ways it is a backlash against what could be argued is a constant all powerful 'hatred' of union by most available outlets. Hatred might be a bit strong there, but I doubt you could make a cogent argument that union has anywhere the level of coverage it deserves. So from that angle the outlet here is understandable.
For example, in all my years of watching rugby I have yet to hear any sort of criticism from the commentators about league, indeed it often borders on outright appreciation, yet (especially when I consider how much league I watch) when watching a league game........
Much of this is of intense intellectual curiosity to me, bums on seats was one point raised that shows the elbow patch crowd have not got it right, yet when viewed against not only the massive exposure of league and the 'criminal' ignoring of union, we have the league guys bagging union at any available opportunity. Couple that then with the league fans getting nothing positive about union in the media, no wonder that we have the relative crowd levels.
Another point I wonder about, let's examine a possible casual exposure of the average league fan (bearing in mind the backdrop already outlined) to a game of union, I'd hazard it is likely to be a test match. But let's face it, a test match is a very different kettle of fish to the average Super Rugby game, or club game. For the very reasons that we would be engrossed (tight, hard fought, everything at stake)-due to it being an average test match-the uninformed league would walk away with his prejudices confirmed (but I'd also wager he did not try particularly hard to understand the different approach, more likely intending to confirm his existing ideas).
Unbeknownst to him tho, it could be that it more exposes the weakness of HIS code (to my way of thinking)..namely that as league is basically only played one way it would not even cross his mind that union can throw up vastly different games in style. How many tries just this last weekend were end to end stuff lasting minutes before finally a try was scored? All too often the 'quality' of a game is indicated by the (high) score. A very shallow view of sport methinks. Was it last year when we drew with the ABs there was an opinion piece in some newspaper...a union guy (jamie someone??) explained hoiw tight it was etc etc despite the low score, and of course a league guy basically saying how lame it was and low scoring blah blah. Anyway, what made me chuckle was that the next weekend was the RL GF, and IIRC it was rather low scoring hehe. Still, if we needed it, simply more evidence of a deep underlying bashing of union using whatever current available means to do so.
So no, he would only see 'test match' rugby, completely fail to grasp it anyway (and not willing to put the effort in) and not have any sort of reference in the media that would help him to (at least) view the game in and of itself. I mean to come to a decision on whether you like the game or not you at first have to be willing to watch it for itself. That is I think what would be the missing step.
So no, don't quite see any vitriolic hatred here, most points that have been raised seem to have been rational, thinking pints, have not seen blind unthinking lashing out at all.