• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

The League Media

Status
Not open for further replies.

papabear

Watty Friend (18)
I don't think belittling individuals because of where you believe they sit on the societal slippery slope is really a good look.

Nor do I believe that any sport has a monopoly on fans from certain demographics.
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
I don't think belittling individuals because of where you believe they sit on the societal slippery slope is really a good look.

Nor do I believe that any sport has a monopoly on fans from certain demographics.


I agree with your first point. However, having played both codes, and watched both, I have to say that there are (or were) some pretty significant differences overall.


On the subect of referees, which is a particular point of difference. In rugby, referees have always been treated with respect.


In your code, referees are tolerated (at best) and are often treated very poorly.

Some other differences. To generalise, rugby is a game that tends to be played in the older, more established, universities and schools, including the academically selective schools. Many top rugby players over the years have attained tertiary education.

In loig, it is not unusual for kids to be signed up at the age of 14, at which point they lose any interest in their education (if they ever had any).

A lot of people still play rugby for fun as adults. How many people play loig for fun?



This does say something about the respective codes, whether you like it or not.
 

papabear

Watty Friend (18)
I know what you are saying Wamberal but I think that goes to the nature of the game itself.

I don't imagine there are many people playing nfl for fun as adults compared to their junior numbers, just due to the brutality of the game.

Going for a run for the Asquith Magpies I imagine would take a lot more toll on the body both from a running perspective and a collision perspective then going for a run for the Wahroonga tigers.

I know what you mean in respect of schooling having attended both a selective school (which played rugby) but by and large followed league and had the general critical point of view regarding officialdom, and an established private school that by and large absolutely loved their officialdom. Both points of view have positives and negatives, I think each code should be trying to maintain a reasonable balance.

Louie - How should you enjoy yourselves, watch the rugby, or the rugby league. Highlights are always good.

Some really good rugby union people don't come from the same places that certain posters come from, and the trials they have endured and overcome in their life would inspire you. Either way remember the old saying about the book and its cover.
 

Godfrey

Phil Hardcastle (33)
I don't think belittling individuals because of where you believe they sit on the societal slippery slope is really a good look.

Nor do I believe that any sport has a monopoly on fans from certain demographics.


Agreed on both points.

Having gone to many games of both codes I've found that it really doesn't bother me if the cocky, unself-aware wanker spilling beer on me as he shoves past with his hooting mates is wearing a suit or thongs. There are dickheads in every "class".

That being said, league fans have a bit of a crown at Suncorp due to the seat-pissing incident. I have seen a few potential challengers for that title at Reds games though.
 

Bullrush

Geoff Shaw (53)
I'm a bit slow. Can someone explain it to me? (I know Graham injured Reynolds)


Ed Sheeran is an English pop star who is huge at the moment......the first line of his latest big hit was "When you legs don't work like they used to before"

That's him on the right :)

James-Graham_-Ed-Sheeran1.jpg
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
Now Dave knows what David Gallop had to endure week in, week out.


Smith is better off than Gallop, he has the Commission as his back-up. Gallop had to deal with the Packers, Murdochs, and all the bloody club, most of which had, and still have, huge governance problems. Without any allies.
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
Monday mornings must have been a bastard.


The point about all this is, Gallop used to say that ratings and other indicators went up when there was a scandal.

No news is bad news. Any sort of media attention is good for maintaining viewership.


Drivers slow down to gawk at accidents, don't they?
 

Wilson

Phil Kearns (64)
To a point, yes, but it often impacts their ability to draw high value sponsorship and there's always the question of what impact it has on a grass roots level, in terms of kids playing the game and parental involvement.
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
To a point, yes, but it often impacts their ability to draw high value sponsorship and there's always the question of what impact it has on a grass roots level, in terms of kids playing the game and parental involvement.


Well, yes. Their game does struggle to maintain a good public image, for sure. It has struggled with its image for as long as I can remember, and that is a long time.

However, they are where they are now in spite of their image problems.


Our image problems are actually pretty significant. Our game is seen as elitist, slow, overly technical and pretty boring to watch.


The big difference is that the NRL is on control of its own destiny. We are not.
 

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
Well, yes. Their game does struggle to maintain a good public image, for sure. It has struggled with its image for as long as I can remember, and that is a long time.

However, they are where they are now in spite of their image problems.


Our image problems are actually pretty significant. Our game is seen as elitist, slow, overly technical and pretty boring to watch.


The big difference is that the NRL is on control of its own destiny. We are not.

There's another way to look at it that arises out the James Graham fiasco: league adherents don't give a stuff about rules or laws. And i don't say that for the obvious reasons.
Did you notice that it seemingly took about 24 hours before anyone said publicly that the penalty was justified because you cannot make contact with a kicker?
So now Gus Gould is calling for the consequences of such contact to be changed - noting that they were introduced in 1981.
League followers are not interested in the subtleties engendered by laws that cannot be readily changed - see Hugh Jarse's link to the Chiefs no compete ruck strategy.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Did you notice that it seemingly took about 24 hours before anyone said publicly that the penalty was justified because you cannot make contact with a kicker?
So now Gus Gould is calling for the consequences of such contact to be changed - noting that they were introduced in 1981.

His only suggestion for change was for where the penalty is awarded. I.e. if that offence occurs at the halfway line, that is where the penalty is awarded, not 10m from the posts, directly in front which is how the rule currently works.

With the NRL's quite reasonable focus on protecting kickers, it seemed unbelievable that the Bulldogs felt so cheated by the outcome. If the kicker was hit after he kicked it and ended up with a serious injury how couldn't it be a penalty?

If they'd accepted the decision on the field it does seem unlikely that it would have boiled over like it did when the referees were pelted with bottles off the field.

The NRL in general (fans, players, journos etc.) seems to always take the position that it is the rules at fault when a close game is decided by a penalty or similar rather than blaming the players for breaking the rules.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top