Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 400 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, 38 years of history from Open Rugby to the present day.
Click here for the digital edition to read online via smartphone, tablet and desktop devices including iPhone, iPad, Android & Kindle HD.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 400
/ View a Gallery of all 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 400
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

The Challenge Cup Final vs NRL


  • Please log in to reply
71 replies to this topic

#41 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 17,921 posts

Posted 26 August 2013 - 09:52 PM

Hull only had about one third of the total possession so you could argue that two thirds of their game was great. Unfortunately the third where they had the ball was abysmal. Hull didn't turn up with the ball in their hands but still didn't get beaten easily as you suggest. You could argue that whilst Hull were pitiful with the ball Wigan could only post sixteen points, with six coming late in the game, after having overwhelming possession. It takes two to make a great game and two to make a game like Saturday's. Wigan were a bit better than Hull but not by much when taking into account the possession each team had.

 

Hulls' defence was superb, it was with ball in hand (or not as the case may be) where they came unstuck. If Hull had managed to hang on to the ball more I think it would have still been a very close game.

 

The game was never a classic, but under the conditions it certainly wasn't as bad as many make out and the tension in the stadium was immense.


Edited by Padge, 26 August 2013 - 09:52 PM.


Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#42 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 17,921 posts

Posted 26 August 2013 - 09:55 PM

Old Wembley like the old Central Park and Knowsley Rd was great for the CC as be it 72000 or 90000 it would alway's looked full.

Rubbish



Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#43 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 4,829 posts

Posted 26 August 2013 - 11:07 PM

"Abject failure"? Overall attendances are their highest since the early 60s ,more people playing than ever before ,better facilities etc etc  and this despite fighting  on two fronts against the rise and rise of Premiership soccer and the growth of professional club RU.

In England and Aus (and America,Spain,Italy...) the decision around which was the primary winter code of football was decided roughly between 1885 and 1910.

Apart from France in the 1930s Is there any example of a mass switch of spectator allegiance to another code in a major sporting market? 

 

Australia in 1908 where the whole NSW union switched to League en masse and seized the initiative in Australia before soccer could get a major grip on the sporting public.

 

Here in the UK, RL was maginalised and ghettoised into its Northern strongholds by the RU apartheid and was  not ever able to break out until the very late 20th century.

 

The RFU's total opposition to any form of pay for play from the 1860 s and 70 s had allowed Soccer to seize the initiative especially after he formation of the professional Football league.

 

RL was in a fairly strong position versus soccer at the beginning but Soccer pursued an aggressive policy of expansion at the beginning of the 20th century and teams such as Bradord City,Bradford Park Avenue, Leeds City, Huddersfield Town, Hull City,Oldham Athletic either switched from RL or were formed in direct opposition to our game and fought us to a standstill in our own heartlands. We responded by radically changing the game to make it more attractive to the paying public,i.e. the play the ball,abolition of the line out, reduction to 13 players and received a huge boost from the All Golds New Zealand teams tour and the tide was stemmed but we never recovered our former position of pre eminence even in our heartlands.

 

It's a miracle the game has done as well as it has in this country. RL in Australia never had to deal with an aggressive soccer game or a very strong RU opposition and the AFL was confined to Victoria for the majority of it's existence.

 

Mistakes have been made aplenty but the game remains the sturdy #### offspring of RU and is in no danger of dying. We should celebrate where we are and we can start that by supporting the upcoming Rugby World Cup in huge numbers and show the world and this country that we are still alive and kicking.



#44 YCKonstantine

YCKonstantine
  • Coach
  • 1,390 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 07:13 AM

Maybe the reason you see close matches in NRL every week is because all the matches are televised whereas SL only gets 2. Yet another incomparable statement you make.

It's time to park the camels.


#45 DeadShotKeen

DeadShotKeen
  • Coach
  • 1,230 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 11:45 AM

If people who profess to love the game spent a bit of time evangelising about it to potential new supporters instead of moaning about how unutterably useless every godforsaken aspect of it is, we might get half a yard down the road towards achieving some of what you want.

 

That said, and taking into account the reality of the situation the British game finds itself in and its chronic lack of finance - how would you go about achieving what you want, if you were the boss at the RFL, without waving a magic wand or spending money that doesn't exist?

 

Lets try turn this into a positive thread about workable, affordable  and achievable progress, rather than lots of no solution spleen venting. (He said, in hope more than expectation).

 

Positivity for positivity's sake is no use to anyone. I simply call it as I see it. I spend much of my working day evangelising about NRL (as in my initial piece) to soccer-mad colleagues - before the abandonment of licensing I did the same about Super League.

 

I drew up my proposal for SL on here a while ago. A reduced 12 team competition involving mergers in Hull, Calder, Cumbria and Cheshire. Naturally it wasn't universally popular, in the same way that NRL's mergers and exclusions were doubtless not universally popular in the late 1990s. I also earmarked 4 expansion sides (Bristol, Edinburgh, Toulouse and London Mk II) for entry at a later stage. This would take much hard work to achieve but crucially - IMHO - it would attract significantly more commercial revenues than at present and could be sold to a high TV bidder.

 

As you want to engage in a positive, constructive debate, what do you think about this proposal?



#46 DeadShotKeen

DeadShotKeen
  • Coach
  • 1,230 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 11:54 AM

I'll go so far as to say that Locke is twice the player that Tomkins is and I mean that in no derogatory way to Tomkins. Locke is IMHO amongst the top 4 or 5 FBs in a league awash with fabulous ones. Much better positionally (and generally) in defence, better kick returner (Tomkins usually chucks the ball so he can take it at 1st receiver anyway) and more likely to get on the shoulder of his half backs at pace. Tomkins has never played at an NRL pace, for one thing. It will be an eye-opener for him and any British outside back entering NRL, let me tell you.

 

In Tomkins favour is his undoubted "X factor" trickery and I genuinely would love to see how this goes in NRL, with a degree of confidence that it will win him respect and plaudits. Personally I'm not convinced he's a FB anyway (for the reasons noted) and see him more as a half back. But the idea that he'll go over there and wipe the floor with the NRL is nothing more than jingoistic chest-beating. Anyway, we shall see indeed.



#47 DeadShotKeen

DeadShotKeen
  • Coach
  • 1,230 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 11:56 AM

Maybe the reason you see close matches in NRL every week is because all the matches are televised whereas SL only gets 2. Yet another incomparable statement you make.

 

That's cart before horse. Why are they all televised? Because the league has established an intensity and demand that makes it viable to do so. Why can SL not achieve this? Why do we blindly accept the hierarchy?



#48 deluded pom?

deluded pom?
  • Coach
  • 8,547 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 11:58 AM

That's cart before horse. Why are they all televised? Because the league has established an intensity and demand that makes it viable to do so. Why can SL not achieve this? Why do we blindly accept the hierarchy?

The biggest sporting league in Europe doesn't have all of it's matches televised live.

rldfsignature.jpg


#49 DeadShotKeen

DeadShotKeen
  • Coach
  • 1,230 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 12:01 PM

The biggest sporting league in Europe doesn't have all of it's matches televised live.

 

No, because it is also lopsided and unsustainable.

 

If you knew anything about my "schtick" you would know better than to think that I want rugby league to emulate soccer. I want it to emulate the NRL, NFL and NBA, all of whose games ARE shown live.



#50 YCKonstantine

YCKonstantine
  • Coach
  • 1,390 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 12:02 PM

Your posts are starting to give me explosive diarrhea


It's time to park the camels.


#51 shrek

shrek
  • Coach
  • 5,833 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 12:12 PM

DSK should your beef not be with the clubs and not the RFL?

 

I may misunderstand where the power sits within the game, but every article I read about restructures seems to involve some sort of discussion and vote by club chairman.  So why not take up issue with your club chairman/chief exec. 

 

Take issues like franchising, we've done it to death on here, if there is overwhelming support at a fan level for it and fans take it up with there own club to influence voting is that not the way to go rather than making the RFL the scapegoat for all that is wrong with the game? 

 

Strikes me if the RFL tried to impose things against clubs will they'd breakway and take the Sky money with them, but I think we've been there before! 



#52 The Big Gun

The Big Gun
  • Coach
  • 390 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 12:18 PM

I'll go so far as to say that Locke is twice the player that Tomkins is and I mean that in no derogatory way to Tomkins. Locke is IMHO amongst the top 4 or 5 FBs in a league awash with fabulous ones. Much better positionally (and generally) in defence, better kick returner (Tomkins usually chucks the ball so he can take it at 1st receiver anyway) and more likely to get on the shoulder of his half backs at pace. Tomkins has never played at an NRL pace, for one thing. It will be an eye-opener for him and any British outside back entering NRL, let me tell you.

 

In Tomkins favour is his undoubted "X factor" trickery and I genuinely would love to see how this goes in NRL, with a degree of confidence that it will win him respect and plaudits. Personally I'm not convinced he's a FB anyway (for the reasons noted) and see him more as a half back. But the idea that he'll go over there and wipe the floor with the NRL is nothing more than jingoistic chest-beating. Anyway, we shall see indeed.

You think Kevin Locke is "twice the player" of Sam Tomkins? I don't even think you'll find many NZ Warriors fans who agree with you on that one.


Edited by The Big Gun, 27 August 2013 - 12:19 PM.


#53 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 3,848 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 01:21 PM

1. I'll go so far as to say that Locke is twice the player that Tomkins is and I mean that in no derogatory way to Tomkins.

 

2. Locke is IMHO amongst the top 4 or 5 FBs in a league awash with fabulous ones.

 

3. Much better positionally (and generally) in defence,

 

4. better kick returner (Tomkins usually chucks the ball so he can take it at 1st receiver anyway)

 

5. and more likely to get on the shoulder of his half backs at pace.

 

6.. Tomkins has never played at an NRL pace, for one thing. It will be an eye-opener for him and any British outside back entering NRL, let me tell you.

 

In Tomkins favour is his undoubted "X factor" trickery and I genuinely would love to see how this goes in NRL, with a degree of confidence that it will win him respect and plaudits. Personally I'm not convinced he's a FB anyway (for the reasons noted) and see him more as a half back. But the idea that he'll go over there and wipe the floor with the NRL is nothing more than jingoistic chest-beating. Anyway, we shall see indeed.

 

1. Borderline trolling. There isn't any point in debating that comment. Notice how the speculation regarding Tomkins generally asks where Locke is going to play rather than Tomkins. Most people assume Tomkins is first choice.

 

2. Right that's fine. Doesn't mean he's better than Tomkins.

 

3. You've plucked those statements out of you're imagination. Tomkins positionally is very good. Whenever teams put in an attacking kick he tends to be there or there abouts. You also don't see Tomkins miss a tackle very often. He has one of the best tackle success rates of a full back in SL, not that matters as he isn't playing against supermen week in week out like other,.

 

4. The giving the ball to a winger is a Shaun Wane thing. Both Hampshire and Tierney have done it this season. I haven't seen Locke make 50 and 60m kick returns against the best two international sides he can play against. Then again you'd probably think Aus and NZ don't play up to the week in week out intensity of the NRL

 

5. Disagree. There's no stats to back it up with for either so no point in debating

 

6. Carney did it and got into the NRL team of the season did he not? I don't think anyone will state Carney is any where near the player Tomkins is.

 

There isn't much point in debating in a comparison between the NRL and SL with yourself and petero. No stat or positive piece will change your mind, I think it's best for the people who actually enjoy the English game to let you get on with gladly moaning about the negatives in our game.



#54 petero

petero
  • Coach
  • 2,833 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 02:36 PM

Sam not being safe under the high ball is slowly becoming a myth. He did have his problems a couple of seasons ago but they are have nearly been rid of completely from his game, along with the little niggles and bad attitude. If you can find 3 instances of Sam dropping a high ball in the last year I'll be very surprised. I can't recall more than one if I'm honest, although I am restricted to only watching Wigan on SL full time and when they are on SKY/BBC so someone who watches them week in week out can probably how much he has dropped it.

The standard of full backs is high in the NRL, but if you think Sam will struggle you are being blinded by sheer bias towards the NRL. Obviously the comparison between players is hard to make as they rarely face eachother but when Sam faced Aus and NZ in the 4N in 2011 he excelled. If you watch the first game against Aus he was involved heavily in all the tries. Making 60m breaks against NZ between 6 players it was all there to see.

His stats in the SL are incomparable to any other player. You mention the only thing Sam is good at his being evasive, you obviously havent watched SL in the last couple of years as his overall game has developed immensely. He offers so much more to Wigan than his attacking threat, the same with Sean O Loughlin in the Wigan side they offer so much to the organisation to the side and helping their side when it comes to reading the game. I'm sure most Wigan fans will confirm how important to the Wigan side both these players are.

You'll think that Tomkins will struggle in the NRL which is up to you. Any stat from SL won't change your mind. Any video clip from SL or against international opposition won't change your mind. We'll just have to wait to see if he goes to the NRL to make a judgement.

But back on thread, can you answer CKN's question of what else can the RFL do?

 

You progress to accuse me of not watching S/L........WRONG! I do but I wonder if in turn you watch the NRL? If not I will inform you of why I believe the Sam will struggle there under high balls, at least initially.

He will be shell shocked at the accuracy of so many of the recognised tactical kickers in the NRL teams, Cronk, Maloney, C/Evans and agood few more are accurate at an alarming rate with kicks placed to put a F/Back or any other defender under the greatest pressure when waiting for such balls.

The players that follow up such kicks are numerous so often and the F/B can expet to be hit and hit hard upon a great many occasions.

Sam will rarely, very rarely, if at all, at this stage of his career been under pressure and on his past record I do not believe that he will find it easy to cope with that, that over time he could improve, I hope he will as I, believe it or not, sincerely do want him to succeed in the NRL, as I do all of the English lads now playing down there, but I do feel that the F/B position being as specialised as it is there will not suit Sam so much.  

 

Sorry for the missing out of O'Loughlin as I thought the emphasis was on Tomkins. However that both are so good for Wigan goes without question, in fact in my own opinion I tend to recognise that O'Loughlin is a far more important cog in the machine than is Tomkins and would be missed more in the long run within that present set up.

 

As you say stats from the S/L are not something that I give much thought about and those concerning the scoring of walkover tries against the likes of Salford, Cas London etc really when compared with the standards of the NRL have little or any relevence towards how someone will perform in that Comp. Look B, the Burgess twins on that reckoning ought to be nowhere close to being good enough for the NRL, their STATs here being practically non-existent, both are more than good enough especially George who has quickly established himself among the best forwards in the NRL, Tom seems to be looking to doe the same, Sam is possibly the best and Luke can at least when fully fit again hold his own, so stats, you are correct, I pay them little if any consideration. 

 

And finally, CKNs question. I already have if will take care to read the reply I gave to him, I will repeat here " I am unconcerned with what the R/L can do for whatever that is, or amounts to, will certainly occur without any input from me anyway. I hope that is suffiecient enough an answer for you. :drag:  



#55 MrFussy

MrFussy
  • Coach
  • 1,419 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 03:17 PM

No, because it is also lopsided and unsustainable.

 

If you knew anything about my "schtick" you would know better than to think that I want rugby league to emulate soccer. I want it to emulate the NRL, NFL and NBA, all of whose games ARE shown live.

Don't forget the NHL!  :nhl:

 

Sorry... just wanted an excuse to use the emoticon. It's one of the best ones that I've ever seen :ph34r: (it does belong with those you list though).


Edited by MrFussy, 27 August 2013 - 03:18 PM.


#56 YCKonstantine

YCKonstantine
  • Coach
  • 1,390 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 03:21 PM

Don't forget the NHL!  :nhl:

 

Sorry... just wanted an excuse to use the emoticon. It's one of the best ones that I've ever seen :ph34r: (it does belong with those you list though).

Maybe we need to put an 'N' at the beginning of SL then, seems to work for everything else.


It's time to park the camels.


#57 MrFussy

MrFussy
  • Coach
  • 1,419 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 03:48 PM

Maybe we need to put an 'N' at the beginning of SL then, seems to work for everything else.

:D 



#58 John Drake

John Drake
  • Admin
  • 7,405 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 04:04 PM

Positivity for positivity's sake is no use to anyone. I simply call it as I see it. I spend much of my working day evangelising about NRL (as in my initial piece) to soccer-mad colleagues - before the abandonment of licensing I did the same about Super League.

 

I drew up my proposal for SL on here a while ago. A reduced 12 team competition involving mergers in Hull, Calder, Cumbria and Cheshire. Naturally it wasn't universally popular, in the same way that NRL's mergers and exclusions were doubtless not universally popular in the late 1990s. I also earmarked 4 expansion sides (Bristol, Edinburgh, Toulouse and London Mk II) for entry at a later stage. This would take much hard work to achieve but crucially - IMHO - it would attract significantly more commercial revenues than at present and could be sold to a high TV bidder.

 

As you want to engage in a positive, constructive debate, what do you think about this proposal?

 

I think your proposals would destroy the game. They are simplistic, uncosted and take no account of past failures, particularly with regard to the suggestion of wholesale mergers of clubs.

 

For example, if you seriously believe merging Hull FC and Hull KR into a single Hull club would have any chance of success whatsoever, then you've clearly never been to Hull!

 

If you trample all over what a club means to the people who support it in order to shoehorn what currently exists into some 'perfect model' league structure, you do not enhance the sport, you completely undermine it at its roots.

 

Before you trot out Australia as the perfect example of such madness bearing fruit, consider the case of South Sydney Rabbitohs: initially ejected from the league because they wouldn't merge, eventually reinstated as a stand alone club after lengthy legal battles, yet currently doing very nicely thank you at the top of the NRL ladder. The merger between North Sydney Bears and Manly Sea Eagles was also a complete and utter disaster from which only Manly escaped relatively unscathed, and they've since gone on to win the Premiership again as a stand alone club. In contrast, the two remaining merged clubs, St George-Illawarra and Wests Tigers can currently be found propping up the NRL table.

 

It just isn't as easy or simple or assured of success as you want to pretend.

 

Then there's the matter of starting up clubs in new areas. How exactly do you propose to finance them? Because without finance, like any club, anywhere, they will fail. If we haven't learned that lesson yet as a sport, then we never will. I've always been a supporter of expanding the game and will remain so, but you can't just stick pins in a map and wish clubs into existence.

 

Australia has its own share of failed expansion experiments: Adelaide Rams, Perth Western Reds and South Queensland Crushers. Remember them? Auckland/New Zealand Warriors has had a traumatic and not exactly success laden history to date, and without having been bankrolled so extensively by News Ltd up until this year, how likely is it that Melbourne Storm would still be around?

 

If we are going to have a serious debate, then it has to be based in reality, not the fantasy you are currently indulging in.


John Drake
Site Admin: TotalRL.com
TotalRL.com
Email: john.drake@totalrl.com


#59 MrFussy

MrFussy
  • Coach
  • 1,419 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 04:13 PM

Seriously though the NHL season consists of an 82 game regular season for each of the 30 teams plus the playoffs. It's therefore normal for each team to play 2-3 games a week and the league is covered by a few different television networks across America and Canada, so it stands to reason that a huge number of games will be broadcast. As such it isn't really fair to compare SL to it. I only watch the NBA and NFL occasionally so I can't really comment on them, but I believe that the NBA schedule has a fair bit in common with the NHL's. 

 

I think that comparing SL to the NRL is fair, due both to the similar number of teams and the fact that most of the games take place on the weekend. I don't like the comparison to American sports, their nature is just too different and I don't think that's even giving SL a chance to look good.


Edited by MrFussy, 27 August 2013 - 04:15 PM.


#60 MrFussy

MrFussy
  • Coach
  • 1,419 posts

Posted 27 August 2013 - 04:23 PM

I think your proposals would destroy the game. They are simplistic, uncosted and take no account of past failures, particularly with regard to the suggestion of wholesale mergers of clubs.

 

For example, if you seriously believe merging Hull FC and Hull KR into a single Hull club would have any chance of success whatsoever, then you've clearly never been to Hull!

 

If you trample all over what a club means to the people who support it in order to shoehorn what currently exists into some 'perfect model' league structure, you do not enhance the sport, you completely undermine it at its roots.

 

Before you trot out Australia as the perfect example of such madness bearing fruit, consider the case of South Sydney Rabbitohs: initially ejected from the league because they wouldn't merge, eventually reinstated as a stand alone club after lengthy legal battles, yet currently doing very nicely thank you at the top of the NRL ladder. The merger between North Sydney Bears and Manly Sea Eagles was also a complete and utter disaster from which only Manly escaped relatively unscathed, and they've since gone on to win the Premiership again as a stand alone club. In contrast, the two remaining merged clubs, St George-Illawarra and Wests Tigers can currently be found propping up the NRL table.

 

It just isn't as easy or simple or assured of success as you want to pretend.

 

Then there's the matter of starting up clubs in new areas. How exactly do you propose to finance them? Because without finance, like any club, anywhere, they will fail. If we haven't learned that lesson yet as a sport, then we never will. I've always been a supporter of expanding the game and will remain so, but you can't just stick pins in a map and wish clubs into existence.

 

Australia has its own share of failed expansion experiments: Adelaide Rams, Perth Western Reds and South Queensland Crushers. Remember them? Auckland/New Zealand Warriors has had a traumatic and not exactly success laden history to date, and without having been bankrolled so extensively by News Ltd up until this year, how likely is it that Melbourne Storm would still be around?

 

If we are going to have a serious debate, then it has to be based in reality, not the fantasy you are currently indulging in.

I think that's a great post John, What you say about St George-Illawarra and the Wests Tigers is a little deceptive though. It's true that neither are having great seasons but they've both been successful since their respective mergers took place, with the Tigers winning the title in 2005 and the Dragons taking it in 2010. I put their lack of success this season down to what I said in the other thread about the balance of power shifting quickly in the NRL. I suspect that both of these teams will bounce back soon.


Edited by MrFussy, 27 August 2013 - 04:24 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users