Super injunctions Extra marital affairs Liasons with prostitutes Paying elderly ladies for sexual favours urinating in public at 5am Missing important drug tests Dodging speeding fines Footy,cricket or rugby?
Depends who you watch! If you watch Scotland, South Africa or England in Rugby Union then you're bound to think its slow as they play ten man rugby, but if you watch teams like Wales, France, NZ and Australia play with the ball in hand then its much faster than Rugby League and much more exciting. Its why most top rugby league players move over to Union in the end!
Rugby union rivals the funeral of the most hated man in town for entertainment. What I am trying to say is it has none. Thats why 90% of the world have never even heard of it. League is better but its like saying aids is better than cancer.
Yeh but that clubs bigger than the sport of cricket and the 2 codes of rugby put together. Its also worldwide unlike the other 2 lol.
Club rugby union is pretty boring but International games are much better than anything super league.
Super League is faster than any rugby union team, and isn't even the top level of rugby league. Watch NRL in Australia - it's like comparing the Champions League to the Championship. The reason top league players move over to union is cos they can get more money, and they know that they will be faster and fitter than their union counterparts which will make up for their lack of knowledge about the game. Andy Farrell is a great example of that - he moved from league to union when he was old, injury prone and widely accepted as being past his best, but still walked into the England union team. Cross code matches also show how much fitter the league lads are - when Wigan played Bath at league they won 82-6, when they played at union Bath won 44-19.
Cannot agree with the comments you make in favour of Union. Even if you watch NZ, Australia, etc their ball handling skills are not as good as their league counterparts. Add to that the constant interruptions to flowng play for lineouts, scrumms etc and you have a far less fluid game. I will hazard a guess that those top league players who do cross-over do so for financial reasons rather than any other.
Farrell walked into the England team because of the hype surrounding him, look at Iestyn Harris, one of League's best players and he was absolute dogshit in Union yet he still somehow kept starting for Wales, similar story with Vainakolo (sp?) who was supposed to be some sort of unstoppable monster and scored more than a try a game for most of his time in Rugby League, then he got exposed at international level at Union and never turned out for England again after his woeful displays. About the comparison between Bath and Wigan, isn't that the same game Jeremy Guscott admitted that the Bath Union side didn't try fully in the scrum, because they'd have destroyed Wigan in the scrum if they had done, and pretty much ruined the game as a spectacle. Plus add to the fact Union players weren't as fit back then, now they're equally as fit and strong as League players, if not stronger and fitter. If you want to use a more recent example look at Sale vs St Helens, who played a half each of League and Union, and Sale beat St Helens 41-39. And now professional Union players are even fitter and stronger, so the gap would probably be bigger than 2 points.
Harris was never one of League's best players...most overhyped players maybe. And his main problem wasn't fitness, it was the fact he was **** at tactical kicking. And Vainikolo was on the decline by the time he switched to union cos the physical demands of league had shafted his knees. Switching codes was probably all he could do to prolong his career at the time. Actually I think he claimed Bath's players couldn't try fully in the scrum cos they would have seriously injured all the Wigan players who had no idea of the technique needed to contest a scrum. The Sharks themselves admitted that their win in that match was purely down to using driving mauls for pretty much every play of the ball. They realised that they couldn't match the league players for fitness and try to run the ball at them, so they just used their superior size and driving muscles rather than try to run, sprint or pass the ball. And in the league half, Sale just camped out on their halfway line and defended for massive periods of the game. I agree that the fitness gap between Union and League has closed over the past decade and a half, but League players still have higher levels of aerobic fitness, speed and quick power. Union players will obviously have higher levels of driving power and stronger legs due to the need to ruck, maul and scrum all the time, but for mobile fitness the league players are still out there. They have to be - on average they make between two and three times as many tackles, runs and carries every game.
Money is the reason they move to Union in fairness it was the other way round until Union went pro. There's way too much kicking in Union and League I just think is a bit more...well it's just more Northern
The essence of rugby is ball handling, running, and passing skills - league is set up to maximise these elements whereas union minimises them. Only one winner for me - the current Four Nations tournament will provide far more entertaining rugby than the snoozefest we just witnessed in NZ. It's just unfortunate that Australia are usually so much better than everyone else and that the international game is only rarely truly competitive.
Yes,his academic qualities shone through the thread like a ray of sunlight on a dark winters evening.
