Re: Rugby Union World Cup : Sat Oct 03, 2015 10:27 pm  

TOMCAT wrote:

Dead Rubber at the Etihad Stadium it is then. That was an England build up followed by an epic collapse and exit that our Footballers would be pushed to beat. I have to admit that I'm gutted, didn't think we'd win, but didn't expect us to be dumped out of our home World Cup at the first cut. Big Sam Come back to where your phenomenal talent would be both appreciated and used, turn away from the dark side.

Glad England lost; they deserved to. Will never understand how anybody can enjoy watching such dross. As you say what a waste of talent in having Burgess play and barely get a chance to show what he is capable of. Surely any impartial sport lover must recognise how telling it is that a guy who plays PROP (damn effectively) in RL plays CENTRE for the RU shower.
The times I watch the game and see players turn back inside with an overlap or bomb a chance by an inability to pass accurately down the line. I'm talking about the international side not a lower league club side. Awful. Some of the tries scored in a RL season would be viewed as extraordinary/exceptional/hugely praiseworthy and repeated ad infinitum if the RU international side were actually capable of scoring anything like them.

For god's sake Watkins do NOT be tempted

Re: Rugby Union World Cup : Sat Oct 03, 2015 11:05 pm  

Two of the best RL players of their generation wasted in RU.

Re: Rugby Union World Cup : Sun Oct 04, 2015 6:03 am  

nantwichexile wrote:

Glad England lost; they deserved to. Will never understand how anybody can enjoy watching such dross. As you say what a waste of talent in having Burgess play and barely get a chance to show what he is capable of. Surely any impartial sport lover must recognise how telling it is that a guy who plays PROP (damn effectively) in RL plays CENTRE for the RU shower.
The times I watch the game and see players turn back inside with an overlap or bomb a chance by an inability to pass accurately down the line. I'm talking about the international side not a lower league club side. Awful. Some of the tries scored in a RL season would be viewed as extraordinary/exceptional/hugely praiseworthy and repeated ad infinitum if the RU international side were actually capable of scoring anything like them.

For god's sake Watkins do NOT be tempted

Don't get me wrong I prefer to watch league. And also agree Sam is a waste in the sport for me.
If you give the super 15 a go you would probably enjoy it. Played with more of a running game and better handling. I agree England were poor, but thought the handling and try for Australia, particularly the second was good.

You cannot really compare league and union in terms of the try scored, for a start there are 4 extra players on the pitch making it more difficult to score. Secondly in league you can have your edges try there luck as you get the ball back. In union if a winger goes for broke and gets isolated then the ball is usually turned over. The seemingly pointless short runs by forwards near the ruck are to try and suck in defenders to make space out wide. England's handling was poor last night

Re: Rugby Union World Cup : Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:21 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

England got what they deserved for negative team selections and tactical approach. Rugby union has evolved beyond a game for eight donkeys up front and two half-backs who can kick.

Sadly, England don't appear to have grasped that. Left their best back-rower in France, kicked their best centre and hooker out of the squad on disciplinary grounds, picked Farrell for his kicking over Ford and Barritt over Burgess for his tackling.

Bet they're glad they gave Lancaster a five year contract.

Couldn't have put it better. Spot on.

You can add to that the fact that Lancaster has been unable to win the big competitive games that really matter. He's taken England as far as he can. What worries me (as I do actually care) is that parallels with Clive Woodward's first WC in 1999 are being drawn and Lancaster will be given 4 more years to "finish the job". He's not Clive Woodward, Andy Farrell is not Phil Larder and Chris Robshaw is no Martin Johnson.

Barritt was an embarrassment in the midfield. He took every pass stood still and simply shuffled it along - something i used to try and get 8 year olds not to do, and spent most of his game laying on top of rucks having a rest. As for Farrell, well you sort of knew he'd do something stupid at some point.

Re: Rugby Union World Cup : Sun Oct 04, 2015 3:06 pm  

Lesley Vainikolo's playing!!!

It really is the world's elite playing.

The money this competition will generate is ridiculous. Why can't we attract people who don't care about RL all year long to our international competitions like RU does?

Re: Rugby Union World Cup : Mon Oct 05, 2015 6:26 am  

Was reading something on the BBC and it gave some stats:

Sure enough, Pocock - outstanding at the last World Cup - was unstoppable once again. On Saturday he made nine tackles, six carries and 14 metres, four passes, two offloads and, most importantly, three turnovers.

Robshaw? Six tackles, five carries, three metres, two passes, no turnovers.

Unstoppable!!! I know their defence is closer but those stats don't look too amazing to me. And considering these are meant to be the tackling machines, they only made 15 between them. Sums up the speed of the game

Re: Rugby Union World Cup : Mon Oct 05, 2015 6:29 am  

I went to Leicester to watch Argentina vs Tonga. It was a phenomenal game. It confirmed to me that I like union as a game to watch but just not the northern hemisppheres way of playing it. Both teams using the full width, running from deep, minimal kicking, good movement and offloading. It just showed that the game can be good to watch if played with the right attitude

Re: Rugby Union World Cup : Mon Oct 05, 2015 6:32 am  

D4mo78 wrote:

Was reading something on the BBC and it gave some stats:

Sure enough, Pocock - outstanding at the last World Cup - was unstoppable once again. On Saturday he made nine tackles, six carries and 14 metres, four passes, two offloads and, most importantly, three turnovers.

Robshaw? Six tackles, five carries, three metres, two passes, no turnovers.

Unstoppable!!! I know their defence is closer but those stats don't look too amazing to me. And considering these are meant to be the tackling machines, they only made 15 between them. Sums up the speed of the game

I saw that, and even though its compsring apples with oranges I still compared it to what peacock does

Re: Rugby Union World Cup : Mon Oct 05, 2015 7:39 am  

D4mo78 wrote:

Was reading something on the BBC and it gave some stats:

Sure enough, Pocock - outstanding at the last World Cup - was unstoppable once again. On Saturday he made nine tackles, six carries and 14 metres, four passes, two offloads and, most importantly, three turnovers.

Robshaw? Six tackles, five carries, three metres, two passes, no turnovers.

Unstoppable!!! I know their defence is closer but those stats don't look too amazing to me. And considering these are meant to be the tackling machines, they only made 15 between them. Sums up the speed of the game

As per the eagle I much prefer the southern hemesphere style of play and the super 15 is very watchable, I imagine a lot of league fans would enjoy it. England are a very hard team to watch.

But comparing stats is pointless they are different games. Having played both codes in the forwards and also in the backs in union I found playing in the backs boring. I enjoyed both codes in the forwards and both were very physically demanding. Lots of shuttle runs in league and big impacts. Lesser impacts in union but you are constantly wrestling around scrapping for the ball. Real scrums. It's hard work!!

Re: Rugby Union World Cup : Mon Oct 05, 2015 8:05 am  

I really don't like England RU, to me they've always played boring rugby and run by an organisation who are so far up their backsides it's unreal.

However I'll gladly watch other watch Union games, Wigan vs Huddersfield last Thursday? Nah it was dull, Canada vs France was much more entertaining