Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Sun Oct 16, 2011 10:59 pm  

SA have won the world cup twice and both times scored no tries. The only tries scored in world cup finals since the turn of the century were Rugby League players.

I was looking forward to watching the All Blacks this morning but again only one try scored in the game. 2 semi finals with a total of two tries. I just dont see what is so great about it. The laws of the game make it so much more easier to defend than attack and thats why the SH has been trying to change laws and rules to make it more exciting.

Quade Cooper to the NRL? The more I see of him the more I think he would struggle.

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Sun Oct 16, 2011 11:28 pm  

liger1992 wrote:

I was looking forward to watching the All Blacks this morning but again only one try scored in the game. 2 semi finals with a total of two tries.

If you want to see loads of points racked up, watch basketball. This preoccupation with tries is quite unhealthy.

I watched both games last night and whilst the Kangaroos looked impressive, the game was over after 15 minutes whilst the Union match was still up for grabs with about 15 minutes to go.

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Sun Oct 16, 2011 11:41 pm  

The Kiwis did have 12 players missing through injury.

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Mon Oct 17, 2011 7:19 am  

gutterfax wrote:

If you want to see loads of points racked up, watch basketball. This preoccupation with tries is quite unhealthy.

I watched both games last night and whilst the Kangaroos looked impressive, the game was over after 15 minutes whilst the Union match was still up for grabs with about 15 minutes to go.

It's a pre-occupation with attacking rugby & the ambition to score tries, not an attention on milking technical penalties & 20 x 2 metre plods for a drop goal.
The league international was disappointingly one-sided. I don't know what the Aus/NZ HT/FT summary was but they slated NZ in the Sky studio here. Rather than use language like immense, colossal, titanic to describe the game they did a honest critical appraisal. Any game can be up for grabs until the last second but still be garbage.

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Mon Oct 17, 2011 4:10 pm  

what if the basketball game consisted only of points scored from free throws? That would be just like RU.

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Mon Oct 17, 2011 7:28 pm  

If ever an article summed up the media attitude to Union it is this in today’s Standard... http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard- ... licious.do The piece at the bottom about France in the final includes the following “No one would doubt that Wales would have beaten France comfortably had Sam Warburton not been sent off. Even with 14 men, they were the better, more forceful, imaginative and enterprising side in the semi-final.” How can one sentence be so wrong... I for one would doubt they would have beaten France even with 15 men and as for Wales being better, more forceful, imaginative and enterprising – well, you could just about muster an argument for the first two but how anybody could call that Welsh performance imaginative and enterprising I have no idea... they were utterly clueless and only had themselves to blame for not posting more points

If ever an article summed up the media attitude to Union it is this in today’s Standard... http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard- ... licious.do The piece at the bottom about France in the final includes the following “No one would doubt that Wales would have beaten France comfortably had Sam Warburton not been sent off. Even with 14 men, they were the better, more forceful, imaginative and enterprising side in the semi-final.” How can one sentence be so wrong... I for one would doubt they would have beaten France even with 15 men and as for Wales being better, more forceful, imaginative and enterprising – well, you could just about muster an argument for the first two but how anybody could call that Welsh performance imaginative and enterprising I have no idea... they were utterly clueless and only had themselves to blame for not posting more points

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Mon Oct 17, 2011 8:41 pm  

Dunbar wrote: If ever an article summed up the media attitude to Union it is this in today’s Standard... http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard- ... licious.do The piece at the bottom about France in the final includes the following “No one would doubt that Wales would have beaten France comfortably had Sam Warburton not been sent off. Even with 14 men, they were the better, more forceful, imaginative and enterprising side in the semi-final.” How can one sentence be so wrong... I for one would doubt they would have beaten France even with 15 men and as for Wales being better, more forceful, imaginative and enterprising – well, you could just about muster an argument for the first two but how anybody could call that Welsh performance imaginative and enterprising I have no idea... they were utterly clueless and only had themselves to blame for not posting more points So if it wasn't 'inner rage' and RU players aren't capable, what was up with Marc Cecillion and Bees Roux? Boys on tour?

Dunbar wrote: If ever an article summed up the media attitude to Union it is this in today’s Standard... http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard- ... licious.do The piece at the bottom about France in the final includes the following “No one would doubt that Wales would have beaten France comfortably had Sam Warburton not been sent off. Even with 14 men, they were the better, more forceful, imaginative and enterprising side in the semi-final.” How can one sentence be so wrong... I for one would doubt they would have beaten France even with 15 men and as for Wales being better, more forceful, imaginative and enterprising – well, you could just about muster an argument for the first two but how anybody could call that Welsh performance imaginative and enterprising I have no idea... they were utterly clueless and only had themselves to blame for not posting more points So if it wasn't 'inner rage' and RU players aren't capable, what was up with Marc Cecillion and Bees Roux? Boys on tour?

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Tue Oct 18, 2011 12:32 am  

76,000 less australians tuned into the RWC than did the NRL Grand Final.......and, when you add the Kiwis, as the NRL like to do.....5,207,180 is the figure you come to.....18% bigger than State of Origin including Kiwis.
Not saying union is a better game, because it's not, but it does put into perspective the inane ramblings of certain aussie posters on this and other sites...

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Tue Oct 18, 2011 8:18 am  

Australia v All Blacks gets 18% more viewers than two 'counties' playing each other. Hardly a surprise. If anything I'd have thought Aussie national pride being put to the test by the rugby union mad folk across the Tasman would have rated much higher.
What is surprising is that 76,000 more Australians chose to watch a club game than the biggest union international in 8 years.

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Tue Oct 18, 2011 10:48 am  

gutterfax wrote:

76,000 less australians tuned into the RWC than did the NRL Grand Final.......and, when you add the Kiwis, as the NRL like to do.....5,207,180 is the figure you come to.....18% bigger than State of Origin including Kiwis.
Not saying union is a better game, because it's not, but it does put into perspective the inane ramblings of certain aussie posters on this and other sites...

Blimey, is that right – 76,000 fewer Australians tuned into the WRC semi than the NRL Grand Final

That’s amazing – a World Cup semi final between Australia and its biggest Union rival attracts a smaller audience than a RL club game (where one club wasn’t even from Australia where the biggest rivalries naturally lie)

Thanks for posting that – really puts the Australian sporting landscape into context