A touch of class

[Spewn]

I believe your point was NSW selected a team with massive reps, without runs on the board and/or steel in the spine.

Soft upper class numpties sounds about right.

And as for the class issue, don't kid yourself. The place has always had have's and have not's.

And what was your point? Apart from demonstrating that you don't know what upper class means.

 

[Scotty]

And what was your point? Apart from demonstrating that you don't know what upper class means.

There are various definitions of upper class in different countries. Economic upper and social upper class differ. They is most definitely an upper class in this country.

 

[cyclopath]

There are various definitions of upper class in different countries. Economic upper and social upper class differ. They is most definitely an upper class in this country.

But are they the cancer in rugby, or is that just a convenient generalisation from the OP? I think softness has been rife in many Aus rugby teams, but whether it can all be sheeted home to upper class numpties is debatable.

 

[RugbyFuture]

Australian rugby would be dead without those upper class numpties. There is a neccessity however to move away from the reliance on this social group, spreading the general demographic of the game wider.

 

[Spewn]

There are various definitions of upper class in different countries. Economic upper and social upper class differ. They is most definitely an upper class in this country.

Scotty,
Wrong.

 

[Hawko]

I believe your point was NSW selected a team with massive reps, without runs on the board and/or steel in the spine.

Soft upper class numpties sounds about right.

And as for the class issue, don't kid yourself. The place has always had have's and have not's.

It does a major disservice to the debate to introduce the issue of class. Last night had nothing to do with class. It had to do with extremely poor play by a team with the physical ability (as proven previously) but absolutely no WILL to go out and do what had to be done to win that game comprehensively. They key issue is "Why did our team, with so much talent, play like they did last night?" As a long time Tah supporter I was distraught; I could barely watch the last quarter hour. Worse, it reminded me so much of the Highlanders game last year. Twice now in the last two years we have not turned up to play. The team's collective head has just not been at the ground. How does it happen? What are the causes? Are there certain individuals in the playing and coaching group who are white-anting the team's morale? Is the coaching team so disfunctional that it cannot recognise when players don't have the right intent leading up to the match and take steps to address it immediately. I cannot believe that some of what we saw last night was not clearly evident in this week's training sessions.

 

[Spewn]

There is a working class and a middle class and a handful of people who have ripped the shit out of others to become extremely wealthy. I wish rugby could pull from all groups like AFL does or rugby in NZ so that the Wallabies could be better.

According to some, only upper class numpties are soft. I suppose that's the same as saying all private school boys are soft. And only upper class numpties send their snotty nosed kids to private schools. And they are the same people who think a Labor gubment (quoting Martin Ferguson) is the only party who could look after the workers or that the Libs are the only ones who can look after the affluent. What a load of crap.

 

[naza]

I reckon the soft underbelly is not exclusive to NSW. Not sure of the cause or whether I agree about the class theory but its there.

When it gets hard, too often Aussie rugby teams don't want to know. Andy Friend got too hard on the Brumbies, and they got him sacked.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Aren't we a little past this cheap shot argumentation about the role of the private schools in Australia?

It is the laziest argument imaginable to suggest that middle and upper class blokes playing rugby union in this country makes us soft. What a load of utter claptrap. South African boys who play rugby go to private schools too. So do young English boys and yes, many in NZ. The whole argument is a complete furphy.

 

[BRIX]

To all the loud mouth Queenslanders.

I Look forward to nothing more than giving you shit when you drop a game that you 'should have won' you classless belligerent pricks.

That is all.

 

[bryce]

I have to admit that sometimes my first reaction to Australian losses like these is to blame it on the fact that our players seem to be drawn almost exclusively from a few private schools in Brisbane, Canberra and the north shore of Sydney, and that they must therefore be soft. But that is just my state school, coalfields background talking. After all, plenty of the blokes at those schools are bushies sent from out west to boarding school. Many of my preconceived notions about those schools were dispelled by plenty of mates I made at sydney uni who went to private schools, who were tough bastards, many of them having grown up on properties out west.

I think weaknesses in our game are mainly down to rugby not being the premier winter sport in this country - imagine all the Nathan Buckley, Gordon Tallis, Andrew Johns and Mal Meninga types we've missed out on over the years. You only need to check the numbers of registered players here compared to other big rugby nations, its on the IRB website. We really are a minnow in terms of numbers.

I say ban AFL!
AFL has robbed this country of so many athletes who should be competing for their country in sports the rest of the world plays. Not just rugby. How many quality locks, loose forward and backline players are there floating around that australian rugby could have done with? Blokes who are 2 metres tall, can run all day and can catch and kick a ball. Not to mention the amount of potentially world class fast bowlers, athletes, swimmers and rowers. (Didn't James Tomkins and Mike McKay get drafted by Aussie Rules teams but chose to keep rowing?)

This is my great hope for the Rebels, that they arouse a bit of interest in young kids down in Melbourne who will want to grow up playing rugby rather than aerial ping pong.

 

[Scarfman]

I reckon the class thing COULD BE relevant. But you need to look at it rationally.

Quick list of countries where class is a major factor in who plays rugby: Australia, England, Argentina, France (also geographic)
As above, but no significant class factor: New Zealand, South Africa, Wales

Hard to see a clear pattern there, although the bottom three are probably among the "hardest" playing groups.

Can we factor in that Australia is the home of running rugby? That the reason we play and watch the game is to see the ball go from hand to hand? Maybe it's more a national culture thing (like French flair / flakiness) rather than a class thing?

Lastly, don't forget that in the Macqueen / Eales years you would have bet on Australia above any other nations to keep their composure and grind out a win. Even then, though, we weren't "hard" in the sense of either dirty or physical, just mentally tough.

 

[Scotty]

Scotty,
Wrong.

Good argument.

Guess you haven't spent much time around places like Ascot in Brisbane?

 

[Scotty]

I reckon the class thing COULD BE relevant. But you need to look at it rationally.

Quick list of countries where class is a major factor in who plays rugby: Australia, England, Argentina, France (also geographic)
As above, but no significant class factor: New Zealand, South Africa, Wales

Hard to see a clear pattern there, although the bottom three are probably among the "hardest" playing groups.

Can we factor in that Australia is the home of running rugby? That the reason we play and watch the game is to see the ball go from hand to hand? Maybe it's more a national culture thing (like French flair / flakiness) rather than a class thing?

Lastly, don't forget that in the Macqueen / Eales years you would have bet on Australia above any other nations to keep their composure and grind out a win. Even then, though, we weren't "hard" in the sense of either dirty or physical, just mentally tough.

Two of the three bottom countries also have rugby as their no. 1 sport. I don't think it is a class issue as such, it is just that we don't have the competition with the playing numbers. There is too much competition from prior to high school, meaning a lot of our players are playing some other 'softer' sports when they are young and therefore take longer to develop. Latham is an example, he was pretty poor in contact when he first started for the Wallabies, and poor also in defense. To be expected when he only took up rugby at 17 or 18 - prior to that he was playing soccer!

It is no surprise on the other side of the coin that guys like Pocock, who has lived and breathed rugby at the best level he could for over 10 years, can make an impact straight away.

 

[Bullrush]

It's one of the biggest differences I noticed when I moved here from NZ just over 18 months ago. I play both union and gridiron and the mentality around contact sports here seems so different.

Kiwis play contact sport because we want contact. We love to hit, love getting hit and just simply rolling people. One of the first trainings I went to here in Aussie had the team doing 'contact training' with two guys in the padded vests tackling two other guys running at them. I have never ever done anything like that before at home. We were just expected to tackle.

One of the factors here though is insurance. With ACC back home, we don't have to worry so much about being covered and guys can just train and play. There is so much worry about liability here that I think it restricts teams and players from going hard right from Day 1.

 

[DPK]

Kiwis play contact sport because we want contact. We love to hit, love getting hit and just simply rolling people. One of the first trainings I went to here in Aussie had the team doing 'contact training' with two guys in the padded vests tackling two other guys running at them. I have never ever done anything like that before at home. We were just expected to tackle.

One of the factors here though is insurance. With ACC back home, we don't have to worry so much about being covered and guys can just train and play. There is so much worry about liability here that I think it restricts teams and players from going hard right from Day 1.

That's pretty interesting stuff, Bullrush. Food for thought.

 

[waratahjesus]

i blame the coaching over the last couple of decades rather than the class system.
we spend so much time running statistics and numbers, i was always told growing up that prep was 10% and hunger was the other 100%. its like we only prepare like its a video game these days then expect it to play out. every loss the wallabies and tahs have suffered (i wont mention teams i dont support cos i would hate to generalise) over the last few years have been through lack of mungral and heart. if players actually cared they would all look like mortlock.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I reckon the class thing COULD BE relevant. But you need to look at it rationally.

Quick list of countries where class is a major factor in who plays rugby: Australia, England, Argentina, France (also geographic)
As above, but no significant class factor: New Zealand, South Africa, Wales

Hard to see a clear pattern there, although the bottom three are probably among the "hardest" playing groups.

Can we factor in that Australia is the home of running rugby? That the reason we play and watch the game is to see the ball go from hand to hand? Maybe it's more a national culture thing (like French flair / flakiness) rather than a class thing?

Lastly, don't forget that in the Macqueen / Eales years you would have bet on Australia above any other nations to keep their composure and grind out a win. Even then, though, we weren't "hard" in the sense of either dirty or physical, just mentally tough.

Scarfy, I think there is a lot of truth to that. One thing I would add is that a lot of South African players have come through their private school system. My neighbour, a Saffer, went to school in Stellenbosch and he's told me on a number of occasions how big private school sports is over there, not only in the Cape, but other parts of the Republic too. I'm sure PaarlBok would say the same thing, given that he's in that area.

I think our rugby ethos has a bit more to do with, as you surmise. We have traditionally favoured the running game here and place less emphasis on the collision. In the modern game though, the collision is very important and we perhaps need to adjust our thinking.

Given how competitive private school sport is in this country, I don't think it's going to be that which contributing to a perception of a lack of hardness. I would also add that plenty of AFL players over here in the West have come private schools, especially Aquinas and Trinity colleges. Veritable footy nurseries both of those places. Many of them were tough hombres, like Ben Cousins (Wesley College), who for all the bad press about him was one of the most fearless players in the history of the game.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Class has absolutely nothing to do with it. Its all attitude. I've played against really hard boys from the supposedly soft cock upper classes who had real mongrel in terms of their attitude toward the game. On the flipside I have also played 140kg Islanders who were as soft as mashmellow but should have slaughtered all before them. I will say this though. Growing up in Sydney's South West the general attitude to sports is different. For many young people in the Inner West, Eastern Suburbs and Upper North Shore sport is just another element to life as there are other opportunities through education, while many who tend to excel in the West view it as the only real option. If you look at the NRL were a great deal of the talent comes from Western Sydney, I can tell you most of those boys would not have had contingency plans. Unlike many Rugby players who have qualifications (.i.e. Baxter - architect) outside of the game. So a far more aggressive and I guess resilent attitude is a requirement.

 

[RugbyFuture]

In the middle and upper classes also some would get to the point of either playing the sport or going on with the education, obviously choosing the latter