Big loss for queensland

[Ken Gargett]

I think the general consensus outside of Oz is that you produce so many good League players because.....everyone else is so poor at it. League isn't even a top 5 sport in the UK, and only really NZ pay any attention to it. There's not really any competition - not really. Australia will get turned over a few times every decade by GB or NZ, but over the long haul it's just not in the same league (pun!). So of course the NRL will consistently produce the best - where else would they come from?

I'm have doubts about the influence of tv. Of course, the more exposure any sport gets the more people know about it, but.... you tend to play what's available when you're young. Build a new town, and fill it with swimming pools and tennis courts and in a few years that's what they'll be producing. On a recent trip though some housing project in Tianjin, China, I walked through a sea of concrete tennis tables amidst the tower blocks. Absolutely rammed with kids playing at 100mph, and it's a sport they dominate. Kids will play with what they have in front of them, not necessarily what's on tv.

That's my 2p anyway!

re league players, i may have misled a bit. i meant more as them as brilliant athletes rather than purely league players. those named would have succeeded in most codes i believe. thurston and inglis especially would be rugby superstars, i have no doubt.

understand what you say re tv and what is in front of them but i think it is all a bit demand driven. if they see plenty of rugby, they'll want to play it. if they see league and afl rather than rugby then that will be their focus.

someone mentioned the nabkick program for afl. it is hugely popular. not all kids will stay but i have no doubt tha some will who might not have otherwise. so a bit both ways.

[bunburyist]

re league players, i may have misled a bit. i meant more as them as brilliant athletes rather than purely league players. those named would have succeeded in most codes i believe. thurston and inglis especially would be rugby superstars, i have no doubt.

understand what you say re tv and what is in front of them but i think it is all a bit demand driven. if they see plenty of rugby, they'll want to play it. if they see league and afl rather than rugby then that will be their focus.

someone mentioned the nabkick program for afl. it is hugely popular. not all kids will stay but i have no doubt tha some will who might not have otherwise. so a bit both ways.

I see. It would indeed make an interesting thesis as there are clearly so many influencing factors.

You could argue though, that tv can have a negative impact, as if kids across Australia are watching this all the time, I'm not surprised League is more popular:

another day at the office for the Wallabies

[El Presidente]

I see. It would indeed make an interesting thesis as there are clearly so many influencing factors.

You could argue though, that tv can have a negative impact, as if kids across Australia are watching this all the time, I'm not surprised League is more popular:

another day at the office for the Wallabies

I don't think it is surprising that union was at its stongest in Oz (Junior participation, club and National Side) when it was an amateur sport.

Amateurism had more free to air Tv coverage than in todays professional ranks. Student participation numbers were up, club rugby was strong and the National side had a competitive team which won the occasional game against the All Blacks. if you were a Queenslander...you played for Queensland. It was not the jersey on your back but the history you carried deep in your soul.

99% of my union boys I have coached for the past 7 years follow Rugby league. I played Rugby League during my senior years at school as well as Union.

Both codes are magnificent exhibitions of skill, brutality and courage.

The difference between the management of League and Union is league is all about the production line of juniors. Union is all about the Wallabies and world cup success.

I coached state juniors for Rugby and know how many of my kids could not watch Super 14 or Heiniken cup because they did not have Foxtel at home. They could still watch 3 games of free to air Rugby League and AFL a weekend.

Game over.

[bunburyist]

....

Game over.

I suppose those are two different issues though - the sport turning pro and pay tv. There is an argument, admittedly a weak one, that pay tv encourages grass roots sports as the money (some of it) gets diverted back into the sport community. At least, this is what people like Mr Murdoch say. You could also argue, that the networks will put whatever attracts the most audiences, and if people aren't asking for Union....

Similary, League is also pro and it hasn't done them any harm in terms of success and participation. But then I guess League has been pro for many more years. Is there any reason why there's no Union on regular channels? Another story perhaps, but I've always thought that any game of any sport involving the national side should be free.

The effect of professionalism, and simply more money in sports has always had an inevitability about it. Just look at European football. The big teams are rolling in their own self-generated income - case in point the silly money being thrown around now - whilst the mid-table and weaker teams...just get weaker. The same effect of concentrating money and success will happen in sports eventually. I've always found the American draft system an interesting method of levelling the playfing field, but perhaps that's for another post.

I think you're dead on with the management of the game in Union being poor. So much pissing around and wasted effort with things like ELVs. I don't know of a single rugby fan from anywhere who's impressed by his home governing body.

What I've found odd with Oz rugby, is that there aren't more League->Union converts. Tuqiri and Sailor are the only two recent ones I'm aware of, and Sailor was rubbish. Surely after a few years in League, if you're good, you'll have won pretty much everything there is to win. The prospect of World Cup, Tri-nations and Lions series wins must be more appealing than beating the same opponents over and over. Plus you can play most anywhere in the world, and get paid well.

For me, it just seems illogical that Union will ever struggle for long in Oz. I'm biased of course, as I've played all my life, but it's just the perfect sport*. Big or small, strong or fast, powerful or skillful - anyone can play. It has an aura of cameraderie that no other sport can touch. I really like League, but I can't love it...it's just a bit too one-dimensional. So much can happen on a rugby union pitch, from just about anywhere. It's so technical, yet so fluid. Above all else, integrity is valued.

Ah, we should be in a pub talking about this - I could rattle on for hours...

*although a few rule tweaks are so obviously needed - straight put-ins at scrums, endless collapses, slowing attacking ball in your own 22 etc etc