Where are RLs Huge Athletes

[Harry Stottle]

16 hours ago, absentee thoughtlord said:

And on this we disagree. Personally, I'd have six subs at SL level and the same number of changes. Part of the game's intrinsic appeal are the collisions and, it follows, those which involve, say, players of 19+ stones are going to be more appealing to the neutral observer.

My biggest criticism of the game over recent years is the relative homogeneity of player stature. But this is simply the result of clubs playing safe within a constrictive salary cap. The 'others' have the luxury of being able to take chances on playing personnel and the variety that produces.

There's no doubt that there ARE very big guys currently playing 'the other' who would do well in League, and especially if coaches were afforded the luxury of being better able to use an extended subs bench.

 

Hi A.T. well we most certainly disagree, 6 subs and 10 interchanges sounds like you are happy with a crash, bang, wallop type of game, for mine I prefer to see skill, creative player's being able to express themselves with guile and agility coming more to the fore when the forwards begin to tire instead of fresh bodies replacing them. With much reduced interchanges those wide playing second rows who permanently stay out there would be required infield to assist the tiring forwards resulting in centre's opposing centre's and wingers opposing wingers were the 6 and 7 have had the opportunity to dictate wider play.

If I wanted to watch the big immobile guy's running into each other most of the time I would watch the other code, please forgive me but your recommendation is pointing to doing just that in my opinion.

[Yorkshire Knight]

21 hours ago, rhinos78 said:

But my point was Union forwards would be abused in rugby league, all your doing is giving me the reasons why they would be abused, focus on this, specific skillset for that...Your trying your best to disagree but your comfirming my point,  they wouldnt be good enough at doing what a rugby league forward needs to do.

You put the best 6 of that allblack pack on a league pitch and theyd get absolutely smashed by most club sides

Put the best six League forwards on a union pitch and theyd all be picked at center for there national team.

Im getting the impression you think im doing union forwards a disservice by saying theyd be rubbish at league, i think its the other way round, your doing league forwards the disservice, iv said countless times league forwards would struggle as a forward in union, but you fail to acknowledge that union forwards would struggle in league, when in reality, most would get absolutely smashed and instead of someone like james Haskells 12 tackles and 7 carrys for 23 meters with only 3 handling errors getting him MOM, he'd be getting put on the fastest transport back to Twickenham. 

You're obviously refusing to understand my point while also shifting the goal posts. It was never about rugby forwards playing in a union backline. I'm saying they wouldn't be able to do what you union forwards do due to the technical requirements. I'm comparing like for like.

But I'll leave it there as I'm already being accused of being a troll just for having a different opinion

[absentee thoughtlord]

7 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

 

If I wanted to watch the big immobile guy's running into each other most of the time I would watch the other code, please forgive me but your recommendation is pointing to doing just that in my opinion.

Not at all. We have that to some degree now, courtesy of the very Australian coaching obsession with percentages.

In fact, I'd much rather see a wider range of statures than we have now for the variety that would entail (11st-20+st rather than the ubiquitous 14-17st).

League's great appeal is that it is so often a case of man v man, especially at speed. I want to see more intriguing match-ups: pace v size, guile v raw skill. We need greater heterogeneity in player stature to best achieve it.

[Harry Stottle]

29 minutes ago, absentee thoughtlord said:

Not at all. We have that to some degree now, courtesy of the very Australian coaching obsession with percentages.

In fact, I'd much rather see a wider range of statures than we have now for the variety that would entail (11st-20+st rather than the ubiquitous 14-17st).

League's great appeal is that it is so often a case of man v man, especially at speed. I want to see more intriguing match-ups: pace v size, guile v raw skill. We need greater heterogeneity in player stature to best achieve it.

OK understand, but could you really envisage anything other than more forwards filling up the interchange bench if numbers were increased to 6 to choose from? The opposite would happen if interchanges were reduced, players with more aerobic capacity to do more game time would be utilised, and they would not be the 10 minute men.

[Rupert Prince]

30 minutes ago, absentee thoughtlord said:

Not at all. We have that to some degree now, courtesy of the very Australian coaching obsession with percentages.

In fact, I'd much rather see a wider range of statures than we have now for the variety that would entail (11st-20+st rather than the ubiquitous 14-17st).

League's great appeal is that it is so often a case of man v man, especially at speed. I want to see more intriguing match-ups: pace v size, guile v raw skill. We need greater heterogeneity in player stature to best achieve it.

Perhaps we should go to 12 a side and combine the 6 with the 13. 

Save on players and money and bring in a complete new club...

[rhinos78]

7 hours ago, Yorkshire Knight said:

You're obviously refusing to understand my point while also shifting the goal posts. It was never about rugby forwards playing in a union backline. I'm saying they wouldn't be able to do what you union forwards do due to the technical requirements. I'm comparing like for like.

But I'll leave it there as I'm already being accused of being a troll just for having a different opinion

Im also saying they wouldnt be able to do what union forwards do, i have been since my first reply to you but you clearly lack the ability for that to sink in.

This dosnt change the fact that most rugby union forwards would get abused in league, which was my original point and anybody with any understanding of both games can see this.

Il also leave it there because with your apparent inability to grasp that iv agreed all along about league forwards not transitioning well to being a forward in union either, suggests you are the troll your being accused of, nobody with a basic level of intelligence could miss the many times iv said it.