Rugby League really gives me the shits

[terry j]

I've always preferred union to league as it offers a lot more variety. But I'm not going to start bagging league. I watch a lot of league. It's a good product, one that is easy to understand and generally skillful. Personally I'm sort of turned off by people on this board talking about how shit league is.

well possibly that is a criticism I have to cop, sorry bout that.

It's not so much that it is shit, but on many levels it is a pale imitation not ONLY of rugby, but what itself once was as a game. Sure, we have rule changes at times (seems more like tweaking rather than wholesale changes as such) but it seems that every time I have another look there is something changed! Ok, bit of an exageration there...but the trouble is every change seems to make it less and less competitive.

In any case, I actually grew up knowing and playing only league, and gradually got completely bored with it. So at least I don't fit the cliche of growing up with one and simply bagging the other (which I agree most would probably fall into), I'd like to think my choice has been made due to the relative merits of each.

Watched fifteen minutes of melb vs balmain tonight...don't feel I have to change my estimate of at most 1.5 passes per tackle!

. I feel a bit sorry for sports fans who's enjoyment of footy is limited to one code. Variety is the spice of life.

I think it is a long bow to draw to suggest that a 'dislike of league' automatically translates to only loving one code. It may be a simple as it sounds, a preference (of whatever dimension) of union over league, certainly does not preclude great enjoyment from different sports.

Rugby

• Penalties at scrum time are a major problem. It is often very hard for referees to decipher which team is to blame for a scrum collapse etc. scrum tactics are becoming more cunning and referees are deciding games. I like Kaffer’s suggestion that teams cant take a shot at goal off a scrum penalty. Either tap and go or kick for touch.
• I’d like to see the clock stop when the ball is either in touch or during scrum time (sorta like NFL). This would add probably another 10minutes of rugby to every game. It is horrible sometimes when you sit and watch one scrum eat up 5 minutes of the game.

Like very much these two objections.

I too have thought that when a scrum has been called, the time stops. The timekeeper can either automatically restart time once it is completed, or the ref can call 'over' or 'completed' or somesuch. In essence, that would be that the scrum is still part of the time but not IN the game if that makes sense.

The only other tweak I personally would like is from no part of the field can you kick it out on the full from general play. Most rules in union favour the attacking team, this one seems to favour the defending team, and removing it would keep the game running in longer contiguous bursts.

 

[USARugger]

i would love to see Inglis at 13. he is a wrecking ball that man.

Anywho, how do you think the union fellas would do in NFL USARugger? I sometimes watch touch downs and think somebody with a good step and wicked acceleration (like cooper or JOC (James O'Connor)) would do alright.. but i dont really know. would any be able to make the switch effectively?

There's only a couple guys in rugby right now who have the speed/size to make the switch and even then they would need to be reconditioned for months. The demands of both games are just extremely different so you end up with two very different types of athlete. No NFL guys could jump right into Rugby either, they quite literally have almost no conditioning base.

For the record I think Rugby is the 'harder' sport. It's more demanding of the players skill-wise and tactically than gridiron is and the running for 80 minutes thing can be a colossal mind fuck. I played both at a relatively high level up until college but turned down some small school offers for football and wrestling to attend a bigger school with better research and coop opportunities where I started taking my rugby more seriously. Played RB/Free Safety in gridiron and primarily 7/13 in rugby although I'd like to try and move to 12.

 

[USARugger]

Digby would also be a running back style player in all likelihood.

Savea could play wide receiver. The others aren't tall enough.

JOC (James O'Connor) could be a slot receiver in the Wes Welker/Danny Amendola mold. Not all receivers are tall!

 

[Richo]

Quade would have been a running QB.

SBW would probably become one of the most dominant tight-ends in the league.

Ant Fainga'a would have been an awesome strong safety.

Palu would be a defensive end.

Pocock would be a fantastic inside linebacker.

 

[USARugger]

Would have to see how Ant and Palu would adapt to the training and demands of gridiron. As it stands Ant isn't fast enough to be an NFL safety and there is no fucking way Palu is quick enough to get around the edge in a way that would make him effective at all as a defensive end. Pocock is too short to be an inside linebacker. There's only one ILB in the Top 25 for high school (so a million miles off from the NFL) here that isn't taller than Pocock.

Quade could slot in at QB but so could most players if they grew up playing the sport, it's easily the position with the most variability in body type and composition. I could just as easily see him being used like the Patriots use Julian Edelman as his overall athleticism and body type are very 'middle of the road', he's good at a lot of things but not exceptionally excellent at any one thing. His COG isn't low enough to be used as anything other than 3rd down back and he isn't quite tall enough to be a regular down-field receiving option and not quick enough to be an elite over-the-middle receiver but he has the capability to do all of those things so would be a very good option to use in mixed packages designed to confuse defenses and force mismatches because they aren't sure who is going to do what once the snap is called.

I could very much see SBW being an elite tight-end, he has the size, speed and evasiveness and some of the best hands in any sport.

 

[BPC]

200cm freaks or fat kids have no place in league. Rugby Union welcomes all

It probably is the only sport which caters to all(mostly) bodytypes and even skill levels.

Be fair, Union is not completely inclusive. For example, in the top tier of Union in Australia we don't cater (and I hope we never do) to players whose main attributes are taking a dump in a hallway or glassing their girlfriend.

 

[Bullrush]

There's only a couple guys in rugby right now who have the speed/size to make the switch and even then they would need to be reconditioned for months. The demands of both games are just extremely different so you end up with two very different types of athlete. No NFL guys could jump right into Rugby either, they quite literally have almost no conditioning base.

For the record I think Rugby is the 'harder' sport. It's more demanding of the players skill-wise and tactically than gridiron is and the running for 80 minutes thing can be a colossal mind fuck. I played both at a relatively high level up until college but turned down some small school offers for football and wrestling to attend a bigger school with better research and coop opportunities where I started taking my rugby more seriously. Played RB/Free Safety in gridiron and primarily 7/13 in rugby although I'd like to try and move to 12.

Agree that there aren't really any players in either code who could make the switch easily. The games are just too different.

I play RB/D-Line and 6 or 8 in rugby (have played 13 for a season as well - when I was skinnier!!).

I wouldn't say that rugby is the 'harder' sport. I just think it's different. One thing you don't really get in rugby is the hard-hitting impacts when you're not expecting it. You learn pretty quick in gridiron to have your eyes peeled ESPECIALLY when you DON'T have the ball.

I've also found that some gridiron players feel invincible once they put the helmet and pads on which makes them a bit more reckless and prone to either injure themselves or others. The issue is that Kiwis and Aussies haven't grown up playing the game so they don't know any better.

I will say that the level of phsicality in both games is higher in NZ in my experience - especially in gridiron. Big strong poly boys who have actually played for a few years and just love hitting. They all want to play D....lol.

Anyway, just my experiences......

 

[Bullrush]

the specialisation of the positions is a function of them splitting the teams up. because they have gone the offense and defense roles, that has allowed people to focus on and specialize in a particular position. so yes, i agree, but it's a manufactured specialization. take it out and to an extent the quality would drop, but at the same time the game would move quicker.

Not sure how it would get much quicker. It really doesn't take that long to swap 11 players. And if you kept the same guys on all the time, they would get fatigued quicker which means play would get slower.

And the differences in playing O-Line to D-Line are massive. there would be a big drop in quality if you had the same guys playing both ways.

 

[Rob42]

I love American football essentially because they took the game of rugby, changed some fundamental rules and then extrapolated as far as possible: "What if we only run set plays?". "What if we allow forward passes?". "How about we enlarge teams to allow the maximum level of specialisation?".

It would be a shame to roll back those changes - why bother making it more like rugby again? They are two very separate, and both excellent, games. Gridiron isn't that slow, it just has its own rhythm. There's just so much going on in every single play, on both sides of the ball, that you want a couple of replays to digest it. If you still find it boring, take in a couple of games with good commentary, like "Sunday Night Football" which gets shown on channel One, and you'll learn an enormous amount.

 

[wamberal]

One thing for sure, is, if you visit loig forums, you will note a total absence of good manners, rational debate, and even humour.

 

[USARugger]

One thing for sure, is, if you visit loig forums, you will note a total absence of good manners, rational debate, and even humour.

That applies to 99% of Internet forums in general!

 

[Sir Arthur Higgins]

I love American football essentially because they took the game of rugby, changed some fundamental rules and then extrapolated as far as possible: "What if we only run set plays?". "What if we allow forward passes?". "How about we enlarge teams to allow the maximum level of specialisation?".

It would be a shame to roll back those changes - why bother making it more like rugby again? They are two very separate, and both excellent, games. Gridiron isn't that slow, it just has its own rhythm. There's just so much going on in every single play, on both sides of the ball, that you want a couple of replays to digest it. If you still find it boring, take in a couple of games with good commentary, like "Sunday Night Football" which gets shown on channel One, and you'll learn an enormous amount.

i'm from canada. i've watched and played a lot of football.
it is a slow game. that's why it takes 4 hours to play 4 x 15 minute quarters.
break between plays, time outs, clock stoppages. its way too slow.

 

[Rob42]

i'm from canada. i've watched and played a lot of football.
it is a slow game. that's why it takes 4 hours to play 4 x 15 minute quarters.
break between plays, time outs, clock stoppages. its way too slow.

Meh. Each to their own, I guess. Personally, I like the fact that in a close game, they can make that last minute of game time last 20 minutes - improves the suspense.

 

[Ignoto]

If you still find it boring, take in a couple of games with good commentary, like "Sunday Night Football" which gets shown on channel One, and you'll learn an enormous amount.

I enjoy NFL for the exact same reason's you listed, but I've never played the sport. So I wonder, do players become bored during the game? I'd imagine a lot of them would be lucky to even be on the field for half of the game.

As a kid growing up (and this also can apply to the parents), do you really want to play half of a game? Surely you could sell rugby to the young ones that you're more involved in the game which I would guess in turn make you enjoy the game more.

 

[Torn Hammy]

JOC (James O'Connor) could be a slot receiver in the Wes Welker/Danny Amendola mold. Not all receivers are tall!

Rugger, what happens to all the college fotballers who don't get drafted. Could they be recruited by the US rugby clubs?

 

[Bullrush]

I enjoy NFL for the exact same reason's you listed, but I've never played the sport. So I wonder, do players become bored during the game? I'd imagine a lot of them would be lucky to even be on the field for half of the game.

As a kid growing up (and this also can apply to the parents), do you really want to play half of a game? Surely you could sell rugby to the young ones that you're more involved in the game which I would guess in turn make you enjoy the game more.

I've played gridiron for the last 10 years both here in Aussie and in NZ - most of the time I've only played running back.

Playing rugby/league growing up, there are times when you wish you could play both ways (and sometimes you do) but one thing I love about gridiron is that the team really is only as strong as the weakest player. Pretty much every play depends on every player knowing their job and getting it done. It can tak just one person missing their block or getting the play wrong or getting beat by their man and the whole things falls apart.

I guess that's also a reason why the positions become so specialised.

 

[USARugger]

Rugger, what happens to all the college fotballers who don't get drafted. Could they be recruited by the US rugby clubs?

Some join up with local clubs afterwards. Most college athletes know they aren't going pro long before graduation so most just go on to lead normal lives or try to stay involved with gridiron through things like coaching. Thing is most players don't get exposed to the game here until college so most players who are playing other sports don't get much more than a very basic exposure, if any at all. One big positive in the past few years has been the growth of the high school game (no thanks to USARugby) which has lead to an increasing amount of players with a dual background who can return to rugby if gridiron doesn't work out.

In regards to Eagles and elite-level player development these guys are infinitely more attractive to me than raw converts. I'm a pretty big believer in the 10 year rule and rugby is such an skill-intensive sport. Reality is most guys picking up the game in their mid-20s will never reach their potential because of the skill aspect and intricacy of the game. At least with dual background players they have a knowledge and skill base to build on which is a huge part of the battle.

Personally when I converted from high level/intensity high school wrestling I figured I would clean up with pure fitness and athleticism. I may have smoked the entire team in the first conditioning run we did but I felt like a lost puppy during my first game. 5 years later I'm now just starting to really 'get' it. Even then there's a big gap between understanding the game and executing a menagerie of skills at pace.

 

[Bullrush]

Personally when I converted from high level/intensity high school wrestling I figured I would clean up with pure fitness and athleticism. I may have smoked the entire team in the first conditioning run we did but I felt like a lost puppy during my first game. 5 years later I'm now just starting to really 'get' it. Even then there's a big gap between understanding the game and executing a menagerie of skills at pace.

LOL I felt the same way when I started playing gridiron!! The are just so different but both are great, great sports.

 

[USARugger]

Yeah it was ugly, they put me in on the wing and in about five minutes I was running with the forward pods and going for turnovers. Was way more comfortable in tight after 15 years of wrestling! Got moved to 7 starting at the next practice


Torn Hammy

One thing I forgot to address in my other post was that the quality of club rugby here and in Straya are very much on two different planets. There are lots of pretty distinct tiers here (drinking clubs vs rugby clubs) but I know that exists in all countries. One thing though is that I really only think the USA has between 1-3 teams (5 at most) that wouldn't get absolutely slaughtered by a good Australian club side like Sydney Uni. When you consider that we're the 3rd largest nation in the world that's not the most impressive of figures. Things are one the rise here (I'd like to believe) but there is still a serious gulf between Australian club and American club rugby. I know guys from the Oz 3rd-tier get signed pretty regularly to overseas clubs, we've got a small handful of players (somewhere between 3-8 I think) playing in 1st-tier domestic comps right now that were actually raised in the USA and played club rugby here before they moved overseas. Other than that our national team is a bunch of POM twats who are 'American' in the sense their grandmother shit here once. I'm hoping we can raise more players here that could be exported but at the same time I do not want to end up in a position like the Argentinians are in with the Top 14 clubs either.

Definitely had the rugby world put into perspective for me two summers ago. One of my good friends from my university club managed to make the cut for the College All-Americans XV, which in itself was fucking awesome. Me and a few other guys made it through to the local and regional all-star sides but either got cut or were injured before All-American selections, pretty heartbreaking because we all knew ahead of time that the AAs were playing the NZ Universities XV. Playing an NZ representative side is a wet dream for most serious college players here. So they ended up actually fucking winning the three game series. In fact, they won the first two and tied the entire thing up before losing the last game 23-20. This was a pretty awesome win for all of us watching and on the field. It wasn't until a while afterwards when we had all gotten together again and were congratulating my bud on the win that he made a good point of mentioning that they'd essentially played the kids who weren't good enough to even get a sniff into the ITM Cup/Super Rugby. We'd played them with what was pretty much the absolute best University rugby in the USA had to offer at the time. Another thing, the USA guys were generally between 21-23 even though there were some young guys and the NZ Uni side was pretty much all U-20s. Was definitely something to think about as it was a pretty tight series, we're improving but still a long way off the mark.

Dug up some photos from the final match if anyone wants to take a look: http://kelleylcox.com/p392084232/h3EC9CDF0#h2641bf7e

 

[Rassie]

In South Africa Rugby league is as big as water polo in Mexico. The first time I saw it I was a bit sceptical. Almost NFL 4 down style taking on rugby sort of thing. But I love the fights. That's the main reason I love it. Especially when Aussies have the state of Origin going on. The fight is like a tradition and and if your lucky a rugby league match breaks out