Re: Sam Burgess Union debut : Mon Dec 01, 2014 9:50 pm  

Seth wrote:

whilst at the same time people are allowed to also think the games crap.

Indeed they are. Problem is, the ability to discern what is a key skill in Union compared to a key skill in League is somewhat important if you're going to try and look clever.
I too think Union is slow and ponderous compared to League, but that doesn't make it a game that all League players would excel at....if that were the case, then the RFU would have the entire England RL squad signed up tomorrow, as would the All Blacks be replaced by the Kiwis. Both Unions could afford to buy their league counterparts many times over, but they don't.

Why do you think that is?

I believe that one of the main reasons is that Union 'skills'(sic) are not those that can be learnt quickly....specifically in the forwards. Most successful league to Union converts I know of have played in the backs in Union.......because league players to a man all know how to pass of either foot well, step and have a good turn of speed. All three of those attributes, vital in league, are less important in a union pack, specifically the front 5. What a forward in Union does need to have is inhuman strength.

Re: Sam Burgess Union debut : Mon Dec 01, 2014 10:38 pm  

I've tried to watch the autumn internationals but it did bore me senseless. Contested scrums are boring and the line out is so pointless. I really don't get those aspects of the game.

I do like the rucks and how you have to control the ball to keep it. I think that's a great element of their game.

What annoys me is the way they attack. There is a complete lack of depth to their offence and the only way that it seems you can break down the defence is to create an overlap through flat passing. That's boring as hell to me.

It would be interesting to ask Shaun Wane to coach the English attack. I wonder how transferable that style of rugby is. Given that they have two extra attackers surely could lead to inventive set pieces, but I have never seen that.

Re: Sam Burgess Union debut : Mon Dec 01, 2014 11:57 pm  

gutterfax wrote:

Why else would anyone bring up a bigger and more popular code and try and make fun of it if they were confident and secure in their own beliefs?
I have no doubt whatsoever that Ben Morgan would out scrummage and out muscle Burgess in the loose. He is skilled at 'getting in the way" of opposition ball as well as "stealing it". He is no less capable of tackling than Burgess, but he is probably far more astute at winning line-out ball, so it may be that "offloading" might be the main area where Burgess has the edge, although the wild inside effort to nobody at all at the weekend shows that Sam may still have a bit to learn on that front. I suspect your ignorance of what a back row forward does in Union may actually cloud your judgement here.....either that or it's highlighting your insecurity.

Burgess has gone to a game where "different" skills are required....comparing what Union forwards do to League is like comparing a video recorder with a toffee apple.....pointless.

lol , it isn't my ignorance, it's your ignorance of the basics of what makes a great rugby player. You insult SB by making the assumption he cannot do the 'getting in the way' or being able to work in the scrum or ball stealing or winning a line out. I've played union (not to a very high level mind nor league for that matter) but it isn't diffucult to pick up, it isn't hard to figure out the nuances of the rules, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what allows you to best your opponent at whatever it is you are doing if you have even an ounce of intelligence & dedication or are you saying that SB is thick, uneducated & cannot possibly learn??

You either have never played sport or are a bit too thick to comprehend that great sportmen can & do make changes to be great in what they do very quickly..IF they are allowed to do so. In the current England set up he'd be the best forward on the pitch but his talents would be utterly wasted in a boring ruck/maul/scrum/kick tactical game that Lancaster plays. As I said it'll win them a few games but never the ultimate prize.
And you make a point of highlighting my so called insecurity, that's truly laughable, you don't even understand human beings on a basic level yet come up with absolute nonsense like that? WTF have I got to be insecure about, WTF does me making a point about the lack of 'rugby' playing by the current England RU No.8 in comparison to the Australian team he played against last Sat and indeed the known capabilities of Sam Burgess? Insecure..FFS you really don't have a fecking clue do you..No don't even bother responding because your bilge isn't worth reading a second time.
It isn't about comparing a league forward, it's about making a comparison to a known skillset and work ethos, about how rugby isn't about just brute strength but thinking power too, something you clearly seem to lack.

You don't know a single thing about me apart from the fact I'm clearly far more intelligent and know more about human nature and understanding the mentality required to play sport successfully..you on the otherhand are a know-nowt gobshite who thinks he knows something about everything when clearly your last post alone proves the complete opposite.
Smell yah later dunce boy

Re: Sam Burgess Union debut : Tue Dec 02, 2014 12:24 am  

gutterfax wrote:

Indeed they are. Problem is, the ability to discern what is a key skill in Union compared to a key skill in League is somewhat important if you're going to try and look clever.
I too think Union is slow and ponderous compared to League, but that doesn't make it a game that all League players would excel at....if that were the case, then the RFU would have the entire England RL squad signed up tomorrow, as would the All Blacks be replaced by the Kiwis. Both Unions could afford to buy their league counterparts many times over, but they don't.

Why do you think that is?

I believe that one of the main reasons is that Union 'skills'(sic) are not those that can be learnt quickly....specifically in the forwards. Most successful league to Union converts I know of have played in the backs in Union.......because league players to a man all know how to pass of either foot well, step and have a good turn of speed. All three of those attributes, vital in league, are less important in a union pack, specifically the front 5. What a forward in Union does need to have is inhuman strength.

A key thing they need is massive strength.....not so much a skill now than just what you can do in the gym. Most RL converts have been in the backs as they are nuisances to be a RU forward that take time to learn and most RL converts have reached too old an age before catching the RU's eye. However the skill set needed in RU, whilst it might take too long for a player to pick up to make it to International level, we seen guys like Shaun Edwards and Andy Farrell who play nearly all the careers in RL gain top coaching gigs in RU. Even guys like Powell and Lowes and Betts and others were able to get coaching gigs in RU even with RL careers. That's quite telling about the skill set/level needed for RU that these guys from the 'other' code can come in and coach it ahead of guys who'll have spent full careers playing RU.

Re: Sam Burgess Union debut : Tue Dec 02, 2014 1:23 am  

knockersbumpMKII wrote:

lol , it isn't my ignorance, it's your ignorance of the basics of what makes a great rugby player.

This is going to be fun.

knockersbumpMKII wrote:

You insult SB by making the assumption he cannot do the 'getting in the way' or being able to work in the scrum or ball stealing or winning a line out.

I assume nothing. If stealing the ball or getting in the way were easy, then union would be soccer and everyone would be doing it......it isn't and it isn't!

knockersbumpMKII wrote:

I've played union (not to a very high level mind nor league for that matter) but it isn't diffucult to pick up, it isn't hard to figure out the nuances of the rules, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what allows you to best your opponent at whatever it is you are doing if you have even an ounce of intelligence & dedication or are you saying that SB is thick, uneducated & cannot possibly learn??

I've played Union at the highest level and the idea of playing league scares the poop out of me.......but I repeat, what goes on in the tight in union isn't learnt in a day! Your idiocy in thinking "anyone could do it" only compounds your insecurity by the way....

knockersbumpMKII wrote:

You either have never played sport or are a bit too thick to comprehend that great sportmen can & do make changes to be great in what they do very quickly..IF they are allowed to do so.

Grand sentiments there that mean nothing. I have excelled at Union, GAA and Basketball as well as having a scholarship at a 1977 1st division soccer club turned down by my father......I know exactly what a top tier sportsman must do do adapt. Sam is a humongous human being that I have no doubt will do well at whatever he chooses, but he will only excel at union if he plays 12.

knockersbumpMKII wrote:

In the current England set up he'd be the best forward on the pitch but his talents would be utterly wasted in a boring ruck/maul/scrum/kick tactical game that Lancaster plays. As I said it'll win them a few games but never the ultimate prize.

Would he f&&k. He'd be hit once by a decent all balck and he'd be off the park for the rest of the game.......it's a different type of hit, a different type of intensity and a different type of strength needed to play union......

knockersbumpMKII wrote:

And you make a point of highlighting my so called insecurity, that's truly laughable, you don't even understand human beings on a basic level yet come up with absolute nonsense like that? WTF have I got to be insecure about, WTF does me making a point about the lack of 'rugby' playing by the current England RU No.8 in comparison to the Australian team he played against last Sat and indeed the known capabilities of Sam Burgess? Insecure..FFS you really don't have a fecking clue do you..No don't even bother responding because your bilge isn't worth reading a second time.

OK...Oh...you haven't finished...

knockersbumpMKII wrote:

It isn't about comparing a league forward, it's about making a comparison to a known skillset and work ethos, about how rugby isn't about just brute strength but thinking power too, something you clearly seem to lack.

Remember now....you're not insecure and I know nothing.....

knockersbumpMKII wrote:

You don't know a single thing about me apart from the fact I'm clearly far more intelligent and know more about human nature and understanding the mentality required to play sport successfully..you on the otherhand are a know-nowt gobshite who thinks he knows something about everything when clearly your last post alone proves the complete opposite.
Smell yah later dunce boy

And there we have it kids. Don't drink and post

Sam Burgess might learn how to play Union and help England win their RWC next year......at which point, it will be "League done it". If he fails, he will return to the game he knows and continue to excel, which will result in "he was bored".

Either way, thick nice people like you will forever hold RL back with your anti-anything-union stance.........and then blame the BBC for ignoring you

...and you claim to be more intelligent than me.......

Re: Sam Burgess Union debut : Tue Dec 02, 2014 2:32 am  

ThePrinter wrote:

A key thing they need is massive strength.....not so much a skill now than just what you can do in the gym. Most RL converts have been in the backs as they are nuisances to be a RU forward that take time to learn and most RL converts have reached too old an age before catching the RU's eye. However the skill set needed in RU, whilst it might take too long for a player to pick up to make it to International level, we seen guys like Shaun Edwards and Andy Farrell who play nearly all the careers in RL gain top coaching gigs in RU. Even guys like Powell and Lowes and Betts and others were able to get coaching gigs in RU even with RL careers. That's quite telling about the skill set/level needed for RU that these guys from the 'other' code can come in and coach it ahead of guys who'll have spent full careers playing RU.

Nobody is saying the RL ethic isn't better. Nor is anyone saying union is a better game....it's just that to date, league players = union backs and no matter what you say, until the actual facts say different, I am correct.......union forward play is not something you learn overnight.

Re: Sam Burgess Union debut : Tue Dec 02, 2014 8:26 am  

Albion wrote:

I've tried to watch the autumn internationals but it did bore me senseless. Contested scrums are boring and the line out is so pointless. I really don't get those aspects of the game.

I do like the rucks and how you have to control the ball to keep it. I think that's a great element of their game.

What annoys me is the way they attack. There is a complete lack of depth to their offence and the only way that it seems you can break down the defence is to create an overlap through flat passing. That's boring as hell to me.

It would be interesting to ask Shaun Wane to coach the English attack. I wonder how transferable that style of rugby is. Given that they have two extra attackers surely could lead to inventive set pieces, but I have never seen that.

Did you watch the game against Australia at the weekend? The Aussies were a joy to watch when they had the ball. Their style of attacking play was very similar to league, with some great runaraounds, dummy runners and cut out passes.
Every time they threw the ball out wide they ate up the yards. In my opinion they really didn't deserve to lose the game, but I suppose a more seasoned union spectator might say that an expansive passing game might look pretty, but it won't always win you the game.

Re: Sam Burgess Union debut : Tue Dec 02, 2014 9:34 am  

Nothus wrote:

Did you watch the game against Australia at the weekend? The Aussies were a joy to watch when they had the ball. Their style of attacking play was very similar to league, with some great runaraounds, dummy runners and cut out passes.
Every time they threw the ball out wide they ate up the yards. In my opinion they really didn't deserve to lose the game, but I suppose a more seasoned union spectator might say that an expansive passing game might look pretty, but it won't always win you the game.

Aside from the Kiwis and SA, the international game seems to be more about gaining penalties and taking 3 points, rather than about scoring tries.
This may be great for the Union purist but, as a spectacle, it's absolutely awful.

Unfortunately, for League fans, RU is the game of "the establishment" and therefore, it will always receive a greater level of media support, regardless of the "spectacle".
At the risk of ridicule on this forum, I can admit to enjoying the odd game, when it is played in a positive manner but, generally this is not the case and the prolonged breaks in play for scrums and lineouts, make the game a boring watch.

If league is ever to steal the media "glare", we have to improve our international game and expand the game.
Failure to do this, whether we like it or not, leaves us as nothing more than a peripheral sport, played in parts of Australia and the North of England.

Re: Sam Burgess Union debut : Tue Dec 02, 2014 10:16 am  

A large part of the difference is also that no top level League player is built for RU scrums or rucks. RU forwards are essentially massive pushing machines designed to push from the legs and hips, with a bit of jumping of course. RL lads are built for explosive speed, agility and upper body strength - in fact an extended family member who played at Wasps for years until leaving recently for a career in the City reckons League lads actually have greater upper body power. That said, I think leg power in RL has come on a lot in the last few years, especially in the NRL with players like Michael Jennings. That doesn't mean they can push and drive like RU forwards, far from it, they're simply not conditioned for it.

If you watch a RU forward play league, they instinctively run with their heads down, ball wrapped up and looking for the floor. League forwards run head up, looking for the collision and hopefully the offload. They also tend to tackle low - a 'textbook' shoulder-to-hips tackle, whereas League players tend to hit and wrap up the chest.

Still, this myth that the mystical skills of the RU pack are impossible to learn is just that, a myth. But no-one is saying they can be picked up overnight. There are technicalities, but nothing that can't be learned with good practice and help. Sam cleaned out a ruck in anger for the first time in his life on debut, and the commentators loved it. The nuances can be learned gradually and Sam seems like a player keen to learn and not afraid or too proud to ask.

I've played both, in the pack and the backs - of course I haven't been nominated for BBC SPOTY 40 years ago like gutters apparently has - but nevertheless I know something of the differences.

Re: Sam Burgess Union debut : Tue Dec 02, 2014 10:27 am  

knockersbump, i'm not sure whats more laughable, your rant or the fact u think SB could be the best forward for England. For a lad who detests union, you must watch a lot of it.