Uni vs Wicks

[wamberal]

The most salient factor in this debate is that the two home-grown, home controlled products are more popular in their own country than the two international codes. AFL is played seriously only here, League has a couple of outposts, but is not a serious international contender.

So you pays yer money and you takes yer choices. Rugby's rules can not be changed, at whim, to suit our local conditions - and that is one factor that inhibits the game's popularity here. On the other hand, league's rules are changed here at the drop of a hat, as, of course, are the rules of the ARL.

I prefer an international game.

 

[Torn Hammy]

I agree that the Shute GF was poor spectacle on T.V. The crowd was small, the field dusty, the commentary uninspiring and the camerawork limited.

I also feel the improved defence and the small number of players in rucks has crowded the backs and killed running rugby. I had hoped to see the skills of Barnes, Inman, Beale and Carter but every time they got the ball there were three or four defenders confronting them. Yet no administration has ever addressed adapting the game to the improved quality and patterns of defence in order to preserve the exciting aspects of the game.

League on the other hand has played around with 5, 7, 10 metre rules and the number and type of tackles and aren't afraid to twist and tweak as they go. They also have Ray Warren, 20 cameras and the best stadia in the country.

All my rugby friends are very frustrated with the game as it is and many are pessimistic about its future.

 

[Groucho]

Yet no administration has ever addressed adapting the game to the improved quality and patterns of defence in order to preserve the exciting aspects of the game.

I think every administration has looked at that in one way or another. The ELVs were at least in part an attempt to shift the balance form defence back to attack. Sadly, the northern hemisphere unions declined to act.

 

[Spewn]

It's got nothing to do with ELVs. For gods sake can Australia have a legitimate club or provincial competition or are the player numbers and support so piss weak for all time that it will always be second rate? I fear the latter. We are commenting on a second rate sport in this country and unless someone comes up with a new plan and sticks to it, then everybody better start finding an AFL team to support.

 

[Nusadan]

I support the Swannies already...

 

[Gagger]

To Lee's point - why is League (or AFL) so endemically catchy? (like herpes)

I reckon it's all about the playground

1 - Don't underestimate the power of what the media pump into Australia regarding league. Seeing just glimpses of it from afar is pretty breath-taking in both it's weight and repetitive propaganda value (like it is here with soccer). Weigh up the number of times the kiddies will be told about the next mungo "greatest game in history" and the players that go with it vs anything for rugby. From this the brands of the clubs are stamped into them and is why it'll be the topic of conversation in the playground

One of the best examples I can give of it's power was in this very forum about the Quade / Parramatta furphy. People actually believed Cooper may well take a pay cut to switch (and miss a world cup, the biggest audition in a game that shits on league for cash), based purely on the power of league propaganda.

2 - Simplicity. The same reason league and AFL are so shithouse boring yet catchy is their simplicity (like draughts vs chess) What's easier for the majority of kids to pick up and play in the playground? This also makes it easy for those half-interested (or moronic) to pick up and follow.
Of course, if choices don't really exist, and media gets behind it, then it's amazing what the public can catch onto. Look at cricket.

These two things are so fundamental, I don't see some law tweaks bridging them, unless you get to the stage of becoming League. And what's the point of that? You've committed suicide and wiped out chess

The single biggest thing that could happen would be a sea change in point 1 - having media organisations bat for rugby like they do for league or AFL. At the moment, I can only see major international success (RWC's, 3Ns) catalysing that. Everything else (grassroot structure, law tweaks etc) is just better organisation and product for the already converted

 

[Gagger]

But getting back to the actual Sydney vs Wicks game....

Having now watched it and put the highlights below together, I'm blown away by some of the negative hysteria in this thread.

I saw Uni play a very good, solid direct style of rugby that absolutely minced a Randwick team whose backline plan seemed to be "give it to KB (Kurtley Beale)" and hope for the best. The Uni pack was relentless in both attack and defence, it was hard to single them out but Dennis, McCalman, Davidson and Charles all had brutal games.

While I can see why Buns got MoM, I wasn't blown away. Great in D, but very lateral in attack. For me most of the Uni attack came through Burgess who had a belter of a game apart from his trademark shithouse passing.

As for the ref - more hysteria. He wasn't perfect but was consistent and didn't overly impact the outcome of the game. It was 46-6 for chrissakes

[video=youtube;nti6iRaalgE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nti6iRaalgE[/video]

 

[Lee Grant]

Gagger your point about the simplicity of league is correct and always has been. It's easy to watch and the rules are easy to understand. It's also easier for a player of any age to pick up as a new player.

This simplicity is a bit of a turn off for me, but obviously not to others.

I still don't understand why the people of Ireland take to their rugby union so passionately with Gaelic Football being so popular over there - and our fans don't.



But back to the game. I didn't think the skills shown were stellar and the physicality of the players didn't compare with that in the Leinster v Munster match - even taking into account that all the Leinster and Munster guys were full time pros.

Generally speaking, our players, in all teams, take too many non-physical options whether they are amateurs or professionals.

Another typical thing I noticed was the poor ability to play at a high level in greasy conditions. Oz players are like babes in the woods when there is a bit of moisture around - again, generally speaking. It's why Scotland beat us in 2009 and why we got smacked at Landsdowne Road a few years back, by opponents playing a narrow game.

The crackdown on the laws has given a premium to keeping the ball in hand but our fellows still have to learn to play grinding rugby. They don't grind and mainly because they don't want to. But I digress.

I will excuse Uni a bit in that department. They can grind a bit. They have good players but they don't necessarily have all the best players in each position in the Shute Shield. However all their guys seem to be eminently coachable and able to play to a plan better than other teams. They are the Borg of Sydney rugby.

From a Tahs point of view I thought that new THP Paddy Ryan had a fine game and from a Rebels point of view Peter Betham had another top Grand Final.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

If we have to dumb down the game to attract more followers, then I'm out. The varying facets of play, the different phases and the different physical attributes in each position are what make rugby interesting to me. If I want to watch a simple, repetitive and often boring game, I'll watch league (origin apart). In terms of the quality of spectacle, rugby played well at the top level craps all over league IMNSHO. I don't want to watch a game that panders to the lowest common denominator and doesn't challenge you a bit. The rules don't have to be Byzantine, but sports like league have taken almost all of the contest for the pill out of it. Where's the fun in that?

All this stuff about the Shute Shield having low numbers is best summed up by the comparison with the SANFL grand final crowd. It's grass roots stuff these days and while its fantastic that the test players come back and play for their clubs, this is not the top level. Most people don't pay a lot of attention to the WAFL over here any more either. If you ask most people who have followed Aussie Rules and who weren't around during the glory days of the WAFL (1970's and 80's) which team they support, most couldn't tell you or have even been to a local game.

Test footy is the main game in rugby, AFL in Aussie Rules and Origin in league. Compare them.

Really, this whole argument is like the old days of cricket when ODI's were apparently killing the game. Well test cricket has scarcely been stronger than it is now, especially since England, South Africa and England have knocked us off the top of the pile.

 

[observer]

But getting back to the actual Sydney vs Wicks game....

Having now watched it and put the highlights below together, I'm blown away by some of the negative hysteria in this thread.

I saw Uni play a very good, solid direct style of rugby that absolutely minced a Randwick team whose backline plan seemed to be "give it to KB (Kurtley Beale)" and hope for the best. The Uni pack was relentless in both attack and defence, it was hard to single them out but Dennis, McCalman, Davidson and Charles all had brutal games.

As for the ref - more hysteria. He wasn't perfect but was consistent and didn't overly impact the outcome of the game. It was 46-6 for chrissakes

You took the words right out of my mouth Gagger. I'm not a Uni supporter but they won the match fair and square. They were clearly better coached. Randwick need to take a reality check. For years they have boasted about getting down to the oval with a couple of warm up laps and a game of touch for training. Total arrogance of course and didn't it show last Saturday. Randwick should get with the times and appoint someone to coach them outside their old boy network.

 

[RugbyReg]

I am not sure if its the way Uni play but I have been substantially unimpressed with their opposition in the last two games - Souths and Randwick. Neither have looked quality. Credit to Uni for stifling them I guess, but neither team looked to have any real direction or game plan. Perhaps the Deans factor is creeping downwards?

 

[Gagger]

Political!

 

[Gnostic]

You took the words right out of my mouth Gagger. I'm not a Uni supporter but they won the match fair and square. They were clearly better coached. Randwick need to take a reality check. For years they have boasted about getting down to the oval with a couple of warm up laps and a game of touch for training. Total arrogance of course and didn't it show last Saturday. Randwick should get with the times and appoint someone to coach them outside their old boy network.

:lmao:

You want them to Poach somebody. from another club perhaps?

 

[Gnostic]

I am not sure if its the way Uni play but I have been substantially unimpressed with their opposition in the last two games - Souths and Randwick. Neither have looked quality. Credit to Uni for stifling them I guess, but neither team looked to have any real direction or game plan. Perhaps the Deans factor is creeping downwards?

Since the retirement of Knox the Wicks have not had a 10 who has consistantly been able to play the flowing backline plays that the Wicks have been famous for. I am enthused by Browne and hopefully he can continue his developement and become that sort of player. Co-incidently NSW Rugby hasn't had that sort of 10 since Bowen. Hence the predominance of the narrow game plans and the reliance on large midfield runners.

 

[RugbyReg]

Since the retirement of Knox the Wicks have not had a 10 who has consistantly been able to play the flowing backline plays that the Wicks have been famous for. I am enthused by Browne and hopefully he can continue his developement and become that sort of player. Co-incidently NSW Rugby hasn't had that sort of 10 since ELLA. Hence the predominance of the narrow game plans and the reliance on large midfield runners.

fixed

 

[observer]

:lmao:

You want them to Poach somebody. from another club perhaps?

It's a free market champ. Get with the times!

 

[Hugh Jarse]

You took the words right out of my mouth Gagger. I'm not a Uni supporter but they won the match fair and square. They were clearly better coached. Randwick need to take a reality check. For years they have boasted about getting down to the oval with a couple of warm up laps and a game of touch for training. Total arrogance of course and didn't it show last Saturday. Randwick should get with the times and appoint someone to coach them outside their old boy network.

If the Randwick development model was so wrong, please explain how they managed to get into all the GF's down the grades. They gotta be doing something right out at Latham Park. If it is shithouse, then what does that say about the teams who didn't make it to the GF? Past and current success would suggest that the Wicks are doing something OK.

Credit where it is due. Uni won by a large margin, because they outthought, and outplayed their opponent. 40 point gap can not be put down to:
a. Rain
b. Poor Field conditions
c. Poor refereeing

Good teams overcome these factors (which are present for both teams), and turn these factors to their advantage relative to their opponents. Uni did that. They created the conditions for the referee to focus on Randwick.

 

[Richo]

Obviously a one-sided game, but I thought there were some real bright spots for the EOYT.

Barnes was excellent. He was a bit lateral running, but often to good effect as his outside backs ran nice lines and he found them regularly. Place-kicking was generally top-notch, defense excellent and goal-kicking was nearly perfect. EOYT should be the time to give him an extended run at 12 outside Quade. But we all know that won't happen...

McCalman was strong and showed some real mongrel. The ABC guys were like a broken record with their "he wants to hit someone" lines but true. Good, strong stuff.

...but on the down side, for the second week in a row Mumm failed to have any impact at club level. Can't we just accept that he's not an international calibre lock and move on?

 

[topo]

You took the words right out of my mouth Gagger. I'm not a Uni supporter but they won the match fair and square. They were clearly better coached. Randwick need to take a reality check. For years they have boasted about getting down to the oval with a couple of warm up laps and a game of touch for training. Total arrogance of course and didn't it show last Saturday. Randwick should get with the times and appoint someone to coach them outside their old boy network.

I am a Uni supporter, and in fairness to Randwick, they had a few critical injuries. Losing players like Elsom, Chisholm and Mitchell is going to hurt any side. The failure of the "Junior Maninoa Experiment" didn't help either. I was at the game and felt a little disappointed that it didn't match the competitive hardness of last year's gf. It was all over soon after half time.

 

[topo]

I know it was only 10 minutes at the end against a beaten side, but Ben Roberts little cameo at hooker was pretty impressive. A couple of massive hits, a couple of runs and a tighthead. Not bad.