WiganShark wrote:Whelley Warrior wrote:WiganShark wrote:It seems some who do occasionally watch Union only look for and see the the negative aspects. Well FWIW I can also comment on the same in League... I've many a dower game at the DW and that farce of a semi at Leigh was just a joke. I was at Langtree park last week for Aus Fiji, great stadium rubbish boring one sided rugby. I then watched the England Ireland one sided farce. Look at the match ups this weekend.
RL England Fiji Aus Ireland, boy the competitiveness will keep you on the edge of your seats!
RU England Pumas, Wales Springboks, France All Blacks, England France Women's Int. RL WC vs AI's no contest AI's for me.
Perhaps that's because their are more negatives than positives in Union and over the years there have been also been some one sided games in both Club and International matches. games
I will repeat that as someone and not a sad someone who loves both codes the "league is best" argument falls flat. At all levels including competitiveness Union more than has the edge. The top Union competitions, Aviva Prem, Heinekin Cup, France Top14, SA Currie Cup, NZ ITM Cup, Super Rugby, SH Rugby Championship, 6N, Autumn Internationals, British and Irish Lions test matches are way out in front. You have the Top 6 or 7 or so RL clubs but in reality probably 4 or 5. The poorly supported Challenge Cup, and play off farce, Aus NFL, State of Origin, that's your lot. Sad but RFL do need to get their collective fingers out before the sport dies on it's feet. It's no coincidence that the likes of Farrell and Edwards chose Union to further their careers, and it's not just about money. I take two Warriors stalwarts to Sale and they love it, not just the rugby but the friendliness and camaraderie of the fans. The facts and figures speak for themselves Union is growing exponentially whilst League is standing still at best, and don't blame Union for Leagues demise it really doesn't hold water. All IMHO of course, I will continue to support both codes as long as I can.
Oh and FWIW I have seen some awful and dower games of Union and games that I've come away shaking my head saying to myself never again, but overall both give me far more than that.
I know you say otherwise but you are increasingly coming across as a Union fan coming onto a League forum. The League fans here who post their dislike of Union are at least being upfront and honest.
I have watched both sports since childhood. I prefer League but I think I can be reasonably objective. Can you because your last post lacked objectivity!
League is not dying (ML recently quoted Jack Robinson as saying that League will never die because its fans love it too much), nor is Union. Of course Union is the bigger sport, only a fool would say otherwise BUT similarly only a fool would ever suggest that the product produced in Union is better than the product produced in League.
Objective measurements not subjective bull continually highlight that the ball is in play significantly longer in League than in Union. It has always been so in my lifetime (30 years of watching both codes).
Until the advent of professionalism in Union (should that not have been the moral end of the sport unless we accept it always existed nut in the form of hypocritical boot money), the notion of being an athletic sportsman and a union player were completely at odds. Nowadays, the top Union players are athletic sportsmen (albeit some have such a narrow remit re their positional requirements in the forwards that their strength / conditioning fit a very narrow defined requirement) compare favourably with other team sports incl RL.
Subjectively/objectively Union has inherent issues that will prevent if from ever becoming an incredible sporting spectacle. I go to sport to watch sport. I do not want to get 'bladdered' nor do I want to sing silly songs and do umpteen Mexican Waves. There is no escaping the simple inescapable fact that the rules of Union inhibit the most beautiful aspect of any rugby code namely running and passing.
15 players is simply too many. I sometimes think 13 is too many BUT in the age of superbly conditioned athletes it simply makes running and passing with the ball increasingly difficult.
The rules / officiating of Union make kicking far too advantageous and daring to run and pass the ball too greater risk. In terms of Risk / Reward; League is simpler, easier and safer. It promotes running and passing. Union never has. Indeed in terms of risk / reward the point scoring system of Union negates running / passing.
3 points for a drop goal or penalty! CRAZY A try equating to 5 points minimum, 7 points if your lucky make a kicking game far far more sensible. Tell me I am lying and that the games (I watched both) I watched today involving England today say otherwise.
Union is also constrained by the set play, scrummage / line out. Forwards who can dominate set play do not need to be rugby players, but they can strangle the life out a rugby game in Union like no other sport. Nowhere was that more evident than in the 6N Championship when Wales destroyed England and the concept of Rugby by technically strangling (scrummaging) the game to death. Nothing is more boring than watching packs of forwards scrummage, even worse for said scrummage to collapse, reform, reset etc etc. I personally would be far happier watching Union with uncontested scrums. I secretly pray for props to be injured when I watch Union.
O'Loughlin is a RUGBY player. NOBODY in the England team forward wise is fit to lace the boots of Lockers and therein lies the problem. Forwards in Union are not rugby players first but second and in some cases not at all. Lockers would never make a Union team which says it all. He is not big enough weight or height wise which is an issue with Union, it is naturally restrictive and works against rugby. Lockers has more rugby in one hand than any England Union forward yet he would be dire as a Union forward because RUGBY UNION IS NOT ABOUT
RUGBY
Even in the backs the rules preclude RUGBY. Sam Tomkins IMO has far more talent than Brown whom I find fairly limited in rugby skill but I would select Brown over Sam Tomkins every time for a Union match. I think Foden or even Ashton are better rugby players than Brown but he is the better Union player, far better than Ashton. I am not even convinced Sam Tomkins is suited to Union which in itself tells you that Union is not about RUGBY.
Even now Union is trying to imitate League with second man plays. What is the saying imitation is the sincerest form of flattery?
The best RUGBY on the planet is played in Australia, the NRL. It has always been so in my lifetime. I have seen some great RUGBY players In Union. There always will be, it attracts more junior talent to the sport than League, albeit League is still as always incredibly strong in the North. Neither sport can even dare hope to compete with football in that respect.
A sensible suggestion I read a while back was that if Union wanted to produce RUGBY players or better RUGBY players as i think it was put, every junior below the age of 13/15 (cannot recall which) should play League and League only because it teaches the fundamentals of rugby (running / passing / tackling) far better than Union ever could. ANYBODY DISAGREE?
Please think before you spout garbage because you are increasingly coming across as a Unionist not a lover of both codes. It seems to shock you BUT League people go to Union for 1) the sheer number of jobs AND 2) THE MONEY. Ask Joel Tomkins did he enjoy today's game v Argentina? I have never seen his talent so under used and I have watched him since he was 16. RUGBY = running / passing.
Oh being churlish for once when Sale play in Sale and not Salford then come and tell me League is dying and Union is wonderful because from where I look it is anything but true.
