Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

LOYALION

League Restructure

35 posts in this topic

I see the 'greedy' superleague club have forced a delay in the announcement as they are concerned about them losing any money. No interest in the health of the game as a whole then?

What a surprise!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many clubs 'sold their souls' years ago - result, an unhealthy kind of RL.

 

 

:tease:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the truth be known - I am not a fan of Super League or any of the teams in it...........they should change Radio Manchester's Rugby League Hour ( if that's what it is still called) to Super League Hour that way I can stop listening to it in the vain hope there will news about clubs outside SL................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spot on Wayne - me too. Saw right through Super Greed about 14 years ago and stopped watching it! You are lucky to get any Rugby League at all on GMR if there is a local football match on as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally go along with the last two postings.

 

The word "super" in Super League should be replaced by something nearer the truth - the Boring and Grossly Overrated League?

 

:sungum:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rename superleague as the aussie has been league, far too many clubs sign over the hill aussies/New zealanders just looking for a payday, I do wish stevo would stop using words like stanza, paddock, shamozzle, claret, and not to mention go for a drop goal all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think super league is a fantastic spectacle

The grand final was a great match to watch and I've enjoyed many games throughout the season

The administration of rugby league is the let down from amateur level to the RFL and super league

The selfish attitude of many chairmen from many clubs is apparent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've posted something similar to this before, but as Rugby League fans lets not knock Super league, which is the pinnacle of our sport, displaying the ultimate athletes - our problem is the RFL and we have discussed their failings many times before, changing the system just for changing sake, making the sport more complicated than it is etc etc

I was at Old Trafford last week with a group of Warrington, St Helens, Wigan supportters and they were very respectful of our history and current situation - I found myself yet again privileged to be a member of the 'Rugby League Family' - nothing wrong with our sport other than the administration (admittedly significant) but Super League shows our game at its best in my opinion.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...displaying the ultimate athletes    

 

"Athletes" yes, exactly, that's what the top players are nowadays and that's partly the problem in my eyes. The "F" in RLFC used to stand for rugby "football", a game played by rugby "footballers", result great entertainment. Nowadays we have more and more "athletes" turning out, result, a far less entertaining product.

 

:tease:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Athletes" yes, exactly, that's what the top players are nowadays and that's partly the problem in my eyes. The "F" in RLFC used to stand for rugby "football", a game played by rugby "footballers", result great entertainment. Nowadays we have more and more "athletes" turning out, result, a far less entertaining product.

 

:tease:

 

Couldn't agree less Keith!

 

There's far more kicking with the foot today than in the dark ages with unlimited tackles!

 

Are you telling me Danny Brough /  Kevin Sinfield are not footballers / entertainers? Perhaps I'm wrong but in my opinion, Sam Tomkins is hugely talented, and entertains as wel!.

 

The game we love (like life) has moved on, and my suggestion to you is move with it, rather than be stuck in a 60s time-warp.

 

Your move mate, and I await your answer with baited breath!

 

Spelly.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well when the world cup starts and Greg Inglis and Billy Slater start their robotic athleticism we should find it relatively easy to combat

I doubt Rangi Chase or Sam Tomkins will be capable of creating a gap in any defence for Josh Charnley to zip through

As for the fijians. ...well they'll be full of players from the NRL who couldn't make it into the Aussie team so they'll be rubbish.

And that Anthony Milford for the Pacific Islanders...his step and swerve is overrated.

In fact this world cup will be rubbish

I think I'll stop watching altogether because the game causes me nothing but misery these days

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Athletes" yes, exactly, that's what the top players are nowadays and that's partly the problem in my eyes. The "F" in RLFC used to stand for rugby "football", a game played by rugby "footballers", result great entertainment. Nowadays we have more and more "athletes" turning out, result, a far less entertaining product.

 

:tease:

Can't agree with you on this one Keith - being athletic surely cannot be a problem in any sport - as John has said our game has moved on and Super League is now played by full time players who are subsequently fitter and therefore athletes to compare with any other sport - and in my opinion the skill factor and entertainment is still their in huge amounts and can still compare with what I saw in the 60s - but that's just my opinion  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"Athletes" yes, exactly, that's what the top players are nowadays and that's partly the problem in my eyes. The "F" in RLFC used to stand for rugby "football", a game played by rugby "footballers", result great entertainment. Nowadays we have more and more "athletes" turning out, result, a far less entertaining product.

 

:tease:

 

Couldn't agree less Keith!

 

There's far more kicking with the foot today than in the dark ages with unlimited tackles!

 

Are you telling me Danny Brough /  Kevin Sinfield are not footballers / entertainers? Perhaps I'm wrong but in my opinion, Sam Tomkins is hugely talented, and entertains as wel!.

 

The game we love (like life) has moved on, and my suggestion to you is move with it, rather than be stuck in a 60s time-warp.

 

Your move mate, and I await your answer with baited breath!

 

Spelly.

 

 

 

 

You obviously don't go to the same opticians as I (and others?) do, do you? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 - being athletic surely cannot be a problem in any sport -   

 

Well, of course it's not a problem, any idiot would agree with that. The problem, as I see it, is that nowadays the Super League 'stars' are athletes first and footballers second (or maybe third).

Whereas in the game's glory days, before the Murdoch/Sky takeover, it was just the opposite with athleticism being an additional asset to a rugby footballer's natural ability.

If you think hard about it for long enough, surely you must see there's got to be sense in my point of view - or are you simply too proud to own up and admit it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have a point blue monkey but I think you are over generalising

In my experience watching Swinton from the 70s on we would have half a decent team and a couple of pot bellied forwards who could barely run a winger who could barely walk and a half back who couldn't pass

What has happened now is 17 fit players. Thats all.

There is no way players are less skillful ...that simply can't happen. Fitness and defence are of so much a higher standard and gaps aren't as easy to find

There are many many fantastic players. Maybe you need to watch them a bit more . Open your mind as much as you're asking us to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, of course it's not a problem, any idiot would agree with that. The problem, as I see it, is that nowadays the Super League 'stars' are athletes first and footballers second (or maybe third).

Whereas in the game's glory days, before the Murdoch/Sky takeover, it was just the opposite with athleticism being an additional asset to a rugby footballer's natural ability.

If you think hard about it for long enough, surely you must see there's got to be sense in my point of view - or are you simply too proud to own up and admit it?

Fine Keith - you used the phrase 'partly the problem' - I have thought about it and I will completely admit to the pure skills of the players of the past but I do feel that the (sorry to use the phrase) athleticism of todays players adds to the value of rugby league - and if their is one thing I am proud about, it is I was lucky enough to be a Swinton supporter in the 60s, but as I am now into my 70s I realise things do move on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add to this discussion - surely when we (as rugby league fans) watch the skills of Danny Brough, Sam Tomkins,Lee Briers etc etc are we not so appreciative of their sills and entertainment value, or have I got it wrong?? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keith,

 

Let me ask you this please!

 

If tomorrow, you could return to unlimited tackles, and contested scrums, that we had in the (not so) good old days, would you give it the thumbs up?

 

What about the standard of goal-kicking? Were Gowers and Blan, better exponents of it than Morty?

 

Why when other sports have improved over the years yet RL (in your opinion) gone backwards?

 

There is far more of the  game played with the foot these days than the ones you hold so dear, so how can you say that today's stars are not footballers?

 

I've watched the Lions for nearly as long as you, so I'm hardly a new boy to the Greatest Game on the Planet, but if I had the chance to turn the clock back to when I first cut my teeth, I'd turn it down flat, as the Rugby League of today is far better in all contexts!

 

Spelly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the standard of goal-kicking? Were Gowers and Blan, better exponents of it than Morty?

 

There is far more of the  game played with the foot these days than the ones you hold so dear, so how can you say that today's stars are not footballers?

 

 

 

John, don't have a myocardial infarction, I totally agree with you on the point about Morty/Blan/Gowers re place kicking.

 

But the literal meaning of the word 'foot' bears no real connection with the true meaning of the word rugby footballers. After all, many, if not most, athletes have always 'played with the foot' so to speak.

 

You and I are different people, seeing things in different ways. Let's just agree to disagree shall we?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fine Keith - you used the phrase 'partly the problem' - I have thought about it and I will completely admit to the pure skills of the players of the past but I do feel that the (sorry to use the phrase) athleticism of todays players adds to the value of rugby league - and if their is one thing I am proud about, it is I was lucky enough to be a Swinton supporter in the 60s, but as I am now into my 70s I realise things do move on

 

Blimey '63, you're even owder than I am (67).  Permit me to tell you about a little 'confrontation' I had at Keighley a few seasons back when I spotted an obvious Leeds fan (wearing a Loiners' blue and gold replica jersey) with his young son at half time. A bit puzzled, I turned to him and said "What's a Leeds (Super League) fan doing at this lowly match then" His quick reply has remained with me since that day. "I've come to watch rugby league as it should be played" i.e not like they do in Super League.

So, you see, there are some of us out there who DO go to the same 'opticians' - in the rugby league sense of the word.

 

PS. If you read my earlier posting again, you'll observe that I never used the line (which you attribute to me), "partly the problem"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John, don't have a myocardial infarction, I totally agree with you on the point about Morty/Blan/Gowers re place kicking.

 

But the literal meaning of the word 'foot' bears no real connection with the true meaning of the word rugby footballers. After all, many, if not most, athletes have always 'played with the foot' so to speak.

 

You and I are different people, seeing things in different ways. Let's just agree to disagree shall we?

 

Touché mon ami!

 

Spelly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blue Monkey I agree with you 100% and yes Spelly i'd race back to the late fifties and early sixties and not only for the rugby but for a better era fullstop. Back to the rugby however the only thing I would take back is a fitness program.Can you imagine what the great Lions team of the early sixties would have been like if they had been given todays training facilities. Remember Spelly when the Lions were creating all those magic tries the opposition wasn't standing as far back as they do now. And as for the comparison of Mort and Gowers, don't make me laugh!. Mort is a better goalkicker but as to an alround fullback Mort isn't in the same class as Gowers neither is Tomkins who although is slightly better on attack than Gowers is nowhere near as good as Gowers was on defence. Any idea where theres a time machine BlueMonkey?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greetings from Vermont on a nice sunny fall Sunday afternoon! The leaves are red and the tourists are in town!

Some of you, like me, missed out on years of RL because of circumstances under our control.

I believe it gives you a different perspective than if you have watched every Lions match for the last, what is it Spelly, 30 years?

In the same way all my nephews and nieces have gone from being kids of four to parents of kids of four in the twenty years since I last saw them until my recent visit, RL has gone from what it was in 1967 to what it is today, bit by bit.

Seen through my eyes, it wasn't incremental in either case, it was a step-wise jump from then to now, but with an occasional glimpse in between.

I read on here about big overweight prop forwards who couldn't run to save their lives! Arnold Thompson, anyone? That wasn't their job. Their job was to ensure we won the ball from the scrum. And don't get me started on scrums...... an integral part of rugby of either code, in my opinion. Play the ball? Doesn't happen. Forward passes? Rife. Offside? All the time. 

So I prefer RL as RL was, not as it is.

 

The eternal argument as to whether Gowers was a better player than Tomkins can never be resolved, so I'm not going there, whoever the discussion is about. 

 

There's a bigger picture here.

If someone like me, gone 40 years, was parachuted into Salford Stadium, or whatever it's called, during a Sales Sharks match, would the game be a reasonably close version of what I might have seen before I left? Try the same thing with the Salford Reds. There has been one significant rule change that dramatically affected RU, the change to professionalism. Otherwise the game is more or less what it was. Does consistency breed loyalty?

 

Now, ask yourselves this question, which is the better supported code, better managed, better promoted? Which one's in the Olympics coming up? Which one has British Lions? Tours down under? 

Like it or not, I believe overall RL is a pale shadow of its former self and on a downward spiral.

None of which stops me from shelling out my hard earned money one or twice a year to see the Lions play, but if it wasn't the Lions, I'd not be interested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 10th April 2017

Rugby League World - April 2017