By gavin
August 19th 2008 @ 2:11am
Loading ...Why do union props always look so unfit?
I’ve been looking at both league and union players over the past couple of decades, especially since the start of professionalism with union, and have repeatedly asked myself why union props are so fat.
Now, I know some will find an excuse for this. But in this age of professionalism, and the prices we pay for tickets, we have a right to expect fit, physically hard players.
This is especially so given their counterparts in “the junior code” are physically fit.
There are those that will say league props are smaller, so find it easier to keep fit. And that they play a different role.
But these reasons are not logical.
I suspect a cultural hangover from the amateur days when the game was an excuse for a drink and I think it’s about time we brought some league props over.
Love this article? Nominate it for The Roar’s Armchair Sports Writer Award. Or vote now for this week’s nominated articles.
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(172)
Benjamin said | August 19th 2008 @ 3:18am | Report comment
(i) Gavin if you’re suggesting that professional rugby union props stil engaing in drinking binges then you are way off the mark. The front row positions attract players of the larger nature. For example, Steve Thompson was always a flanker but had weight issues and so was moved to the front row. Despite his ridiculuous training schedule he still has weight issues - some people just do. It’s genetic. On top of his training schedule Thompson has to cycle for an hour every single night just before bed. He doesn’t eat badly, he trains for hours every day - he is just a big bloke. I imagine that applies to a lot of props, and in fact a lot of people.
(ii) Whilst some props may be harbouring fat, that is a necessity for the position. You can’t be a prop and have a 32 inch waist. League props can, union props can’t. It is completely illogical to assume that the two positions should have similar body shapes.
(iii) If any professional props were that unfit then they would not be played would they? It is only logical that coaches will not stand for a lack of dedication, nor a player that would let the team down.
(iv) Andrew Sheridan, Carl Hayman, Greg Somerville, Andrea Lo Cicero, Martin Castrogiovanni, Al Baxter, Peter De Villiers, Olivier Milloud, Cobus Visagie… these player’s aren’t fat.
(v) Scrummaging takes years and years of experience. League props would get destroyed. It would be embarassing. Top level props need to be scrummaging all week long from the age of 15 upwards.
(vi) Nic Henderson. Enough said.
Geoff said | August 19th 2008 @ 7:45am | Report comment
The props are arguably the fittest players in a rugby team as they have to work so much harder than anybody else. They do a massive amount of work in scrums - the rest of the pack is just contribtuing to their work - then they have to get to breakdowns to work again. They do most of the lifting in lineouts and most of the grunt work in rucks and mauls. On top of that, modern props are also expected to make tackles and run with the ball like a backrower.
There is no way a league prop could handle the workload - they only play for about 10 minutes before getting a rest. Also, they would lack the skills and core body strength needed to be competitive as a prop in rugby.
Justin said | August 19th 2008 @ 8:07am | Report comment
Gav, Gav, Gav - for the last time GIVE IT UP. The more you go on with this the more it shows you have little idea about the differences and skills involved for props in Rugby. Its becoming a little embarrassing not to mention tedious.
matta said | August 19th 2008 @ 10:31am | Report comment
Gav - you’re a flog FULLSTOP
matta said | August 19th 2008 @ 10:36am | Report comment
oh and before that get taken the wrong way, I mean that in the nicest way.. you know..
Mitch O said | August 19th 2008 @ 10:59am | Report comment
Gavin,
The only RIGHT you or any other sports fan has is to choose to watch a sport, or, to NOT watch a sport. If you choose to spend your time or money ($1 or $1000) on watching a team play any sport then you can reasonably expect the game to actually take place, but even this is probably not within your rights.
To claim rights to specific body shapes/weights or team performance shows a flawed/misled logic. Time and time again I hear fans (sometimes, even more disgracefully, sporting administrators) talk about fans Rights when it comes to a national side or even the local footy side. The fact is you DON’T have any rights beyond to watch or, to not watch. By all means exercise this right, if the body shapes of some front rowers bother you so. After all viewing sport is voluntary.
Peter K said | August 19th 2008 @ 11:03am | Report comment
There is no need for a prop to be fat.
However if you look at the pure physics of scrums with the power coming from behind you, the height of scrums , and you look at lifting in lineouts and driving in mauls it is advantageous to have a lower centre of gravity.
You need a lot more power through the legs and core body strength. That means having a barrel body with strength rather than lean muscle is advantageous.
League props have the same body shape as league secondrowers, like Civiceno. They would be poor union props in general. The exception is a guy like Webke who had that barrel body lower centre of gravity body shape.
True Tah said | August 19th 2008 @ 11:17am | Report comment
Gavin,
it would be interesting to compare the strength levels of league v union props.
League props might possess suprerior aerobic fitness, but I reckon the core strength of rugby props would be far suprerior.
Andrew Sheridan has been recorded as bench pressing over 200kg (that is a lot)…I dont think too many NRL players could do this, but I could be wrong.
Union props would spend a lot more time close to the ground, and need to have that explosive strength to lift off the ground, whether its a ruck or a scrum.
Benjamin said | August 19th 2008 @ 11:24am | Report comment
I think everybody is missing the obvious here. If I take Jason Leonard as an example; he played two games of rugby, on top of training, from the ages of 15-19, then stepped up a class and played once a week. Allied to all of the live scrummaging at practice, that is countless hours of propping. The whole point of scrummaging is to expose yourself constantly to new technique. It takes years to be a truly competent prop, and hundreds upon hundreds of games. Even if league players are exposed early that sort of teenage experience cannot be replicated simply because a lot of illegal techniques are not practiced at the higher levels. Another case in point is Andrew Sheridan who is a power scrummager but he is still learning every game. In his first season as a prop he got absolutely stuffed, and he is the most freakish forward in world rugby. What hope would someone like Kieron Cunningham have? (I use him as a specific example because it was mooted that he would join the WRU and play hooker)
Chris Ash, syd Aust said | August 19th 2008 @ 11:38am | Report comment
Benjamin has hit the nail right on the head in reply to your article. I’m sorry to sound rude but it was a rather brainless article gavin.
Are you expecting props to look like some WWE wrestler on steroids? Hardly - they need a very strong neck and the less of it the better. Have you not heard how George smith likes to keep his tub on - it gives him the ‘buffer’ so to speak he needs, and props need a whole lot more of that!
id like to see you do a beep test against any one of the wallaby props.
True Tah said | August 19th 2008 @ 11:43am | Report comment
Benjamin,
Cunningham would have no hope of ever being half decent hooker.
Chris,
how much of a “tub” does George Smith have?
Chris Ash, syd Aust said | August 19th 2008 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
hehe id say a good inch of tub.
Mark H said | August 19th 2008 @ 12:10pm | Report comment
Then why are power lifters and weight lifters look so big? The answer is because the need to be to be able to do what they do. They dont look it but they are very fit men. The strongest man in the world, Mariusz Pudzianowski, his heart rate reaches 180 bpm and moves some serious weights on obstacle courses. He is extreamly stong,fit and big.
In contact, the front rowers need to out muscle the opponent down low and up high. It s a fine line, you have to be aerobically fit as well as strong in contact. Thats why they are big guys. If you think about 2 x 900kg packs slamming into each other, it puts a massive amount of pressure on the body. Rucks are the same.
If you are running, each step you take, you just about double your weight in impact on your joints. So imagine a scrum. It would be dangerous to be lean. Those boys work pretty hard. As I said it’s a very fine line they tread to be able to play the position.
Big Kev said | August 19th 2008 @ 12:14pm | Report comment
Obviously mass is key to having the power and strenghth to be a top Union prop. If a guy does too much aerobic work it will affect his mass (should be muscle, not fat) and he will lose power and strength. hence they are not as aerobically fit as other players, coupled with how much effor is required at scrum and lineout time, it is obvious they appear tired from time to time and end up walking to a scrum / lineout.
League props have the luxury of standing around doing nothing when one of their teamates is hitting it up and are only required 1/5th of the time!
Geoff said | August 19th 2008 @ 12:19pm | Report comment
“League props might possess suprerior aerobic fitness, but I reckon the core strength of rugby props would be far suprerior.”
True Tah,
I seriously doubt that league props would be able to match the aerobic fitness of union props - they would be quicker and more explosive - but there is no way they could handle the constant workload of a union prop.
League props need to make explosive runs, get up an play the ball and then rest. They need to make tackles, get up at marker or get back 10 metres. Union props need to do all their set piece work - and unless you have propped a scrum you can have no idea of how physically taxing that is - and then get to the next breakdown. Once they get there their work begins. When they make a tackle they need to get up and contest the ball or the ruck and then get to the next one to do it again. Then they need to get to the next stoppage work again, and again, and again, without a break for 80mins.
Peter K said | August 19th 2008 @ 12:21pm | Report comment
When league had real scrums, even if it was just 6 man packs, thier body shapes were very similar to the union guys. No surprise there.
The rest of the league forwards were built very much as they are now. When league got rid of real scrums then real props and hookers were no longer needed, instead we get 5 vey similar forwards in body shapes plus a hooker who is smaller so he can pass quicker from the tackle.
Benjamin said | August 19th 2008 @ 12:23pm | Report comment
Tah, I know. I was just using him as an example as he was vigorously chased by the WRU. In league though he is perhaps the only player with a body suitable for front row conversion. All other props are too tall and lean.
Central North said | August 19th 2008 @ 1:08pm | Report comment
“I’ve been looking at both league and union players over the past couple of decades, especially since the start of professionalism with union, and have repeatedly asked myself why union props are so fat.”
Gavin. Gavin Gavin Gavin…
When will people such as yourself get the point - Union and League are SEPERATE SPORTS.
A League prop would be lost in Union, as a result of its constant motion, core strength requirements, and most vitally, lack of interchange. That and you’d need to add on average around 10kg to most (with most league props being between 99kg and 105kg).
Union props would lack the sheer explosive power and foot speed required to bend the line in League.. plus at over 110kg they’d be like lumbering dinosaurs on a league field.
Different beasts. Both have to be supreme athletes - but in the example of the power lifters above, we come in all shapes and sizes and some shapes are better suited to some sports..
True Tah said | August 19th 2008 @ 2:37pm | Report comment
Mark H,
Mariusz Pudzianowski is not fat at all, he is cut like you wouldn’t believe.
And he also plays rugby, Im not sure he played at prop, but I have seen pics of him playing for his local team in Poland.
I can’t believe you started a thread based on this gavin.
Mark H said | August 19th 2008 @ 3:51pm | Report comment
True Tah,
Your right. If youve ever watched this guy in action, Mariusz, he is a machine. The point I was making is that he is built for his sport. Props and Hookers are built for rugby. Now if league was fair dinkum about scrums, youd see leagies built the same way. Thats never going to happen.
Gav,
I hope weve all been able to provide some insight.
Netrug said | August 19th 2008 @ 5:01pm | Report comment
Props in league and Rugby cannot be compared.
When leaue changed fron eight forwards to six, it was the props that were done away with, not the props. The second row became the props and the flankers became the second row in league.
It is why the league scrum is so unstabilisrd. The props just nod their heads and the second row are trying to break away as fast as possible. So compare Rugby locks with league props, Rugby flankers with league second rows and Rugby no. *s with league locks. Even hookers can’t be compared as league use half backs. Props are just incomparable.
Steffy said | August 19th 2008 @ 5:17pm | Report comment
“Then they need to get to the next stoppage work again, and again, and again, without a break for 80mins”
Apart from all the breaks in play.
I agree that a rugby prop couldn’t do the job of a union prop but then the reverse is also true so there isn’t really much point comparing them.
mudskipper said | August 19th 2008 @ 5:34pm | Report comment
Ben Alexander is a prop for the new generation Wallabies, can scrummage, excellent defence and has good ball skills… I hope he gets another run before the Tri-nations is over this year…
mtngry said | August 19th 2008 @ 7:09pm | Report comment
A couple of years back Matt Dunning came to my club, If you saw him with his jersey on it looked like his paunch was over his pants, he took the jersey of and had a six pack.
fridgey said | August 19th 2008 @ 7:11pm | Report comment
Gavin, you truly are a deluded individual…
Two different codes, two different skillsets…
I have played frontrow in both codes and can honestly say that league props need to have a supreme level of explosive power and good aerobic fitness to be able to move forward rapidly when required and be able to break tackles, and to be able to run back ten metres, then forward to make the tackles, which is why rugby is totally different.
Rugby props need to be able to contest all scrums at 100% (as opposed to the farce that is a league scrum), make it to the progressive rucks and mauls, to clear out the offending opposition, or pick the ball up and drive to create a platform for the next phase repeatedly until the backs are ready to use it (and then if you are seagulling in the backline you are instantly prepared to back up the runners or accept the ball yourself if called upon), and this can go on indefinately until a knock-on or infringement or the ball is out of play, thus creating a new challenge to be undertaken, ie scrums, Lineouts, set pieces…So if you see a 110kg plus man breathing heavy and coasting to the next scrum or lineout understand the workrate he is achieving is enormous. I used to think of lineouts as the only time you have to catch your breath, if only for a few seconds as being number one in the lineout meant lifting duties, and being hooker meant throwing in then wrapping around to create a maul, well, you get the point…20 seconds of heavy breathing here or there doesn’t mean we are unfit, just done a sh*tload of work…
Gavin, you really are an uneducated rugby supporter, thats for sure…
hawawa said | August 19th 2008 @ 8:37pm | Report comment
who says props aren’t fit?!
ever heard of RODZILLA? he RAN!!! yes ! from a scrum he got the ball and ran atleast 50m and scored a try!!
and! tatafu polota-nau
SCORED A TRY! he is a hooker and he is big but he ran 60m and scored a try!!
Peter K said | August 19th 2008 @ 8:48pm | Report comment
hawawa - I think you are referring to Greg Holmes, it was 50 metres and he grabbed a ball from a ruck, and just ran straight.
prop 53 said | August 19th 2008 @ 8:58pm | Report comment
Props are the engine room of the team, they are involved in all 80mins of the game in all aspects of the game. To even suggest that he is unfit is a insult and come from someone who as no knowledge of the game. You should go out and try it one day but then again you would be probably be to unfit.
Maybe you would be better off watching tennis or something similar.
hawawa said | August 19th 2008 @ 9:02pm | Report comment
Maybe. don’t think i am old enough to know/appreciate who Greg Holmes is. Possible Rodzilla did the same thing aswell
Benjamin said | August 19th 2008 @ 10:59pm | Report comment
Pudzianowski plays prop, guys. Imagine plodding up to the first scrum and seeing him squatting, grinning at you. Bad times.
gavin said | August 19th 2008 @ 11:22pm | Report comment
Sadly the mod left out most of my post
I knew it. Look at all the excuses. Any medical practitioner will tell you these blokes have a mass body index of fat that doesn’t match their height. They can lose fat and still have muscle. You do not need a mud gut to aquire the skills of a prop forward. That’s a ridiculous thought
Muscle is weight. How about losing 20lbs of fat and replace it with 20 lbs of muscle. I said they look unfit. I didn’t say they were. However, if they lost that fat, they could get to the loose ball quicker, run quicker, and perform better generally.
These guys are FAT. Simple. It has no benefit to their game.
Fridgey says
“Gavin, you truly are a deluded individual…
Two different codes, two different skillsets…”
Frdgey, you were a fine prop I’m sure, but your understanding of my post and anatomical knowledge is sadly lacking. Rugby props are fat, and it has no relationship to skills…got it!
mtngry said | Today | Report comment
A couple of years back Matt Dunning came to my club, If you saw him with his jersey on it looked like his paunch was over his pants, he took the jersey of and had a six pack.
Thanks mtngry, you are helping me prove my point. Dunning is the best prop we have by far
Peter K spoke with some sense here. Well done Pete. There is no need for a rugby prop to be fat. They could perform better without fat
some of you chaps are comparing skills. Read what I said again. It is about carrying fat, which restricts what they can do
I am a rugby union supporter, but I have to agree, these slobs in the front row are Jenny Craig’s dream, and for the money we are paying to see a game, we do deserve better, Mitch O.
The fitness trainers of these blokes have suspect qualifications or are easily pleased. The “High performance unit should be renamed the “Low performemence unit
Unless we get hard bodied chaps in the front row, we ll continue to suffer bad results
Benjamin said | August 19th 2008 @ 11:56pm | Report comment
Name these fat props then? You keep referring to this mythical union of fat, overweight players. Who are they?
Btw… Al Baxter is a ‘hard bodied chap’. That clearly illustrates that physical shape has no correllation to propping ability whatsoever.
Steffy said | August 20th 2008 @ 12:07am | Report comment
“medical practitioner will tell you these blokes have a mass body index of fat that doesn’t match their height.”
I wouldn’t take a BMI measurement as an indication.
gavin said | August 20th 2008 @ 3:12am | Report comment
Ben. Look at any major game. The Oz props especially. The Taffys appear to have a couple. As far as Baxter is concerned, he is a better example in terms of physique, he is just a 2nd rate prop. I bet a prop will perform better with less fat
Unless you are a polar bear i suspect fat is better replaced with muscle
gavin said | August 20th 2008 @ 3:16am | Report comment
Ben said
“(ii) Whilst some props may be harbouring fat, that is a necessity for the position”
Oh dear oh dear!
Benjamin said | August 20th 2008 @ 5:48am | Report comment
Gavin, did you not see the Olympic male weightlifting?
Name these props, it is all well and good saying props are fat. But if you have no specific examples then you have no argument.
Furthermore I note that you have no response to my thread that highlights the necessity of experience. Let’s be frank… your theory is not practical or applicable in any shape or form, so next time you try to be sarcastic at least have a basis for yoyur argument.
Azamatang said | August 20th 2008 @ 7:36am | Report comment
“I suspect a cultural hangover from the amateur days when the game was an excuse for a drink and I think it’s about time we brought some league props over.”
Id like to see that, most wouldn’t stand a chance in a real scrum!
as for open / broken play with rucks and mauls most leauge players that come over to Rugby have a lot to change in there game to be a sucessfull player, Either learning the finer points of tactical scrummaging, the basics of contesting in the ruck (blowing over and counter rucking) and the skills some have immense trouble with is letting go of the ball when off their feet and tackling with arms.
“I’ve been looking at both league and union players over the past couple of decades”
mabey so, But i suspect it has all been from the comfort of his lounge chair.
Justin said | August 20th 2008 @ 8:10am | Report comment
Gav if you want to use BMI as a measuring scale of how fat props are then you had better lump the whole team in coz none of them would be in the “correct” bracket. BMI isnt a good scale. I would guarentee you that just about all pro rugby players would be in the over weight or obese category.
As for deserving better coz you pay to watch them - thats a laugh. They dont play for you, you deserve nothing and nor do I. The reason we are spectators is that we arent good enough to be out there so I would suggest you enjoy the privilege of watching world class athletes romp around the field. They play for themselves and their team mates. Spectators have no rights and deserve nothing.
Benjamin said | August 20th 2008 @ 8:21am | Report comment
Jonny Wilkinson is obese according to BMI.
True Tah said | August 20th 2008 @ 8:42am | Report comment
gavin,
ifs it muscular, fat-free bodies you like to watch, then maybe you should consider becoming a body building fan?
gavin said | August 20th 2008 @ 9:45am | Report comment
Ben,
we are not talking weightlifters who specialize in what they do. I would maintain if they are fat, they shouldn’t be. What has experience got to do with my question ? I was talking about players being too fat. England players calling our props “teletubbies”!
I don’t give a rat’s arse about their skills which are not relevent to my question, unless losing fat would make them better performers.. I think they are too fat, which they visibly are
Azamatung, yes I have been i the lounge chair. However, I still see blokes who are fat as mud. There is no reason for being overweight. It is obvious to me their training regime does not include fat loss muscle gain. Ut’s there in front of yer eyes.
Justin, rugby players are not athletes. Sprinters, hurdlers javelin chuckers are athletes. Wel I believe we do have a right to expecgt better in the professional period from the “Qantas” Wallabies. If they want to streal our team and make it a Qantas marketing exercise and expect us to fly on their airline they can supply a decent product. That’s what the game is now, a product, not a sport! We have franchises, not teams
If Qantas 747s have a weight & balance problem like our props, then you won’t see me flying with them
These blokes are fat, speaking generally, you only have to look at them.
Jerry said | August 20th 2008 @ 9:52am | Report comment
“Sprinters, hurdlers javelin chuckers are athletes” - What about those who compete in the shotput, discuss and hammer throw?
Charlie said | August 20th 2008 @ 10:09am | Report comment
Actually Gav, mtngry is not proving your point. I’ll type it slowly so you might understand. If you saw him with his jersey on it looked like his paunch was over his pants (in other words he LOOKED fat), he took the jersey of and had a six pack (in other words he is NOT fat). Looking fat and actually being fat can be two completely different things. Perhaps you should focus less on the appearances of the players and just enjoy the game.
Justin said | August 20th 2008 @ 10:12am | Report comment
OK now you have got me - to say that rugby players are not athletes is one of the most moronic things I have ever heard. You Gav have no idea, plain and simple. The rest of your rant about Qantas is relevant how? Being banned on here is the only thing holding me back from calling a spade a spade in relation to you Gav, truly astounding stuff!
Benjamin said | August 20th 2008 @ 10:35am | Report comment
Gavin, your article suggested that these mysterious props are not fit, or physically hard, thus they are not good props. The question of experience is significant because experience is the key development tool in the germination of top props. To that extent physical shape is completely and utterly irrelevant.
Did you not see the German gold weightlifting medalist? He had a large belly. Why should he not be fat? Do you know more than the top German weightlifting coaches or for that matter international and domestic rugby coaches?
Mark Regan called Australian the front row ‘Telletubbies’. Have you ever seen the state of Regan? He hasn’t got an abdominal muscle in his body, yet he managed to do a good job. I’m sure certain players carry weight because their personal trainers allow them to, which suggests that any excess weight is not to the detriment of their job.
Again, who are you actually talking about? Who is too fat?
Peter K said | August 20th 2008 @ 10:35am | Report comment
I agree with both sides.
Props are power athletes and most at the elite professional level are not fat. BMI index does not apply, muscle weighs more than fat so if you are heaving muscled you weigh more. A skin fold test would be better.
Gavin is correct that there is no requirement for any fat. Muscle is better than fat. The less fat the more mobile and proficient they will be. There is a diminishing rate of return on shedding fat, all footballers have some fat, they are not marathon runners.
Looks are deceiving, players with the barrel shape I mention may look fat but they are not. Somerville, Dunning, Baxter, Robinson, Holmes.
There are some Australian props who are carrying excess fat. Rodney Blake, Kepu, Dyana Edwards, Shepherdson, the WA props. Stiles was a classic weak butterball.
Then there are props who are lean, lack strength and lower centre of gravity like Henderson who are poor props.
At club level most have a lot of excess fat but they are not professional so what do you expect.
Benjamin said | August 20th 2008 @ 10:42am | Report comment
Peter, it always helps to have a little bit of fat because muscle bruises much more easily and a slight fat provides padding. I don’t think it is a coincidence that so many international props have always have a slight pouch. I emphasise the word slight.
Peter K said | August 20th 2008 @ 10:45am | Report comment
I forgot to mention that beyond a certain level props have to spend more time on scrumaging, mauling, etc rather than losing weight or gymwork. Technique and skills is more important than muscle or carrying excess weight after a point.
The best scrumager who is really strong may have genetics that means he puts on fat easy. Since he needs high carbs and protein to keep his muscle on and still trains hard there is not much more he can do.
Peter K said | August 20th 2008 @ 10:48am | Report comment
Ben, yes I know, league players themselves carry some fat.
AFL players and soccer players are a lot more lean and the same arguments Gavin uses could be used on league players to make them even more nimble and shed the fat they have. They need it as well, just not so much.
Mitch O said | August 20th 2008 @ 11:22am | Report comment
Gavin,
You don’t DESERVE anything. Rugby Union props owe you NOTHING.
If you find their waistlines a problem simply watch another, skinnier, sport (that’s your one indisputable right remember?). One of the beautiful things about rugby is it caters for all shapes and sizes and speeds and strengths, if you’ve got the conditioning to get selected, then you’re good enough.
If your point is each player in the Wallabies should maintain their fitness at an optimum level then you won’t get any arguement from me (what that optimum level is for any individual is beyond me, best to ask a sports scientist). Trouble is you seem to be taking the more bizarre tack of claiming an ownership interest in Dunnings waistline.
matta said | August 20th 2008 @ 11:28am | Report comment
BMI is bullshit!
Armchair_Expert said | August 20th 2008 @ 12:02pm | Report comment
Peter K,
Regarding you comments;
” forgot to mention that beyond a certain level props have to spend more time on scrumaging, mauling, etc rather than losing weight or gymwork. Technique and skills is more important than muscle or carrying excess weight after a point. ”
I would have agreed with this comment, however watching the wallabies,I was astound how little time they actually spent practicing there scrummage (I coould clearly see this from my office window over a number of weeks).
Also Rugby league players are on average are bigger than they where in the 80’s and part of the reason is the interchange.
(NSWIS recorded Ian and Nathan Hindmarsh having one of the Highest VO2 max recording in the game and both play with a bit of a gut)
Union Props need the weight (Excess fat) as it simply helps with the scum and can carry it around in the game due to what I would call the unoffical timeouts that are a feature of both games.
Rick said | August 20th 2008 @ 1:33pm | Report comment
Gavin, so these allegedly ‘fat’ props are ruining your enjoyment of the game?? Maybe you want them to slim down, do away with all that silly scrummaging and mauling so they can be leaner like league props - but, wait a minute, there’s already a game for them, it’s called rugby league!!
gavin said | August 20th 2008 @ 3:17pm | Report comment
Hi Rick!
Hey listen pal,
It could be J O’Neill and Co and their ELVs will do away with the “silly scrummaging” and mauling. You know there is a rumour in the home unions that the ELVs were invented because Oz forwards especially props are useless. I like to think that isn’t true of course, but the rumour remains.
Basically, all I want is for the props to trim down and bulk up with muscle
Matta says
“BMI is bullshit”
Thankyou Dr Matta!
Quote Peter K
“I would have agreed with this comment, however watching the wallabies,I was astound how little time they actually spent practicing there scrummage (I coould clearly see this from my office window over a number of weeks).”
Someone on this forum mentioned the stats that every time the Wallabies played in test matches, there was a higher incidence of collapsed scrums. If this is true, and I don’t know it is, this would be due to what Peter K mentions above. Also the ELVs require less emphasis on scrummaging and mauling, which I think is stupid, as the ball is always won by the forwards. So they are training with the ELVs in mind
Personally, I would hate to see the ruck and maul removed from the game, but the ELVs perhaps do this to a degree. Maybe this will perhaps, and I emphasis perhaps justify league props coming over. This would make the technicalities easier for league converts
Time will tell
No Mitch, I have no interest in Dunning’s waistline. It was mentioned before by someone he had a six pack. They all should, and no, not the drinking kind
All I can do is again quote Regan of England calling our props “Teletubbies” He’s right isn’t he ?
fridgey said | August 20th 2008 @ 3:35pm | Report comment
You’re enjoying this sh*t stirring Gavin, because that is all it amounts to, the fact is a league prop would not be a walk up start in any super14 team, and likely wouldn’t walk into a top grade side like uni or randwick, shit even blakehurst props would give a first grade rugbyleague prop a serve, beergut and all…
To be able to cross over requires total transformation of physical attributes from speed and aerobic explosion, to endurance and strength and constant aerobic exercise…Wether you carry a few extra mm’s of fat around the middle or not is irrelevent, as long as the job gets done…
We (the wallabies) are not a great scrum due to our poor technique, not weight/ fat issues….
matta said | August 20th 2008 @ 3:47pm | Report comment
Gav, I think its quiet time for you now mate.. you’re making a fool of yourself.
gavin said | August 20th 2008 @ 3:48pm | Report comment
Fridgey, I am certainly enjoying the “intellectual” cut & thrust, for sure. However , I believe there is some substance in what I say. By the way, I am not suggestion league forwards would walk into any top flight rugby side. It would take a couple of years at least if they had a previous rugger background, longer if not. I like the aggressive nature of their play and their willingness to to look the Richard Loe types in the eye and “deal” with them if necessary, which is more than the “teletubbies” could do. Dunning is the only one that will have a “go” at the other crew.
We need rugger props that are technically efficient, with the attitude of Beetson , Sattler Ryan and Noel Kelly. You looked sideways at these blokes and you copped one right on the jaw! Just the thing the Boks and ABs need
The league blokes play in a culture of “the biff”. It comes in handy
gavin said | August 20th 2008 @ 3:59pm | Report comment
matta said
Gav, I think its quiet time for you now mate.. you’re making a fool of yourself.
Luv ya “matta” (grin )
fridgey said | August 20th 2008 @ 4:27pm | Report comment
I will find this hard to swallow, but i have to agree with you on the “MONGREL” factor, we seriously lack that in spades…What makes me smirk every time is Baxter, he has the mean look down pat, never seen him back it up though…
Still don’t agree with anything else you’ve said though, sorry mate…
fridgey said | August 20th 2008 @ 4:33pm | Report comment
And i find a smidge of respect in your acceptance that a league prop could not walk into a rugger starting pack, so i accept that you have a general idea that they are chalk and cheese…To be honest, if you have the skills to prop in rugby and you have had years of experience, you can actually lose a fair amount of weight and still be competitive, however have done so and taken it too far, you may end up as a hooker…This happened to myself when i went from a 130kg third grade prop to 110 first grade prop, then over the off season i went down to 76kg and ended up losing my place in first grade as i could no longer hold my own against the heavier opposition…So weight does come into it…
mudskipper said | August 20th 2008 @ 5:32pm | Report comment
I can’t believe this blog now has 60 hits…Rugby props are wider because the pies are better at the rugby…
matta said | August 20th 2008 @ 6:11pm | Report comment
to be honest - I think we can hit 100.
gavin said | August 20th 2008 @ 6:50pm | Report comment
130 kgs. Shit! I’d hate to try and mix it with you. A big lad. Surely fat can be shredded and replaced with muscle to some degree, muscle is weight, although I see your point re ending up a hooker
Yes, I fully understand, that, if first grade NRL props came to rugby, you’d have to start them low low down somewhere. But tey could well be ex rugby blokes and could take to it well and make their way through the grades.
Mudskipper, you may have something there.
Peter K said | August 20th 2008 @ 7:37pm | Report comment
Of course this one has so many entries. Everyone knows the MOST important position is Prop
Luke said | August 20th 2008 @ 9:45pm | Report comment
that’s only in australia mate, that’s why the wallabies scrum is so bad…..take a look at the two best props in the world, Andy Sheridan (loose head, England) and Carl Hayman (tight head, All Blacks), who are both around the 6ft 5, 125kg mark and have six packs…..A good example, too, is young Ben Alexander who has recently been mixing it with the wallabies front row but mind blowingly not being involved in the tri nations until the South Africa Tour, Ben is 6ft 3 and 120kg, he’s lean, massive and a good footballer and effectively the only real prop in the country by modern professional standards, the like of big ben need to be scouted and groomed in Australia, land of the wayward big man!!
Benjamin said | August 20th 2008 @ 11:23pm | Report comment
Luke, they are exceptions to the rule, in terms of their physique and athleticism. In any case it took Hayman a few years to turn some loose podge into that hard muscle. The majority of the props in world rugby are not bodybuilders; Horan, Hayes, Jenkins, Jones, Jacobsen, Murray, Perugini, Castrogiovanni, Milloud, Marconnet, Woodcock, Somerville, Stevens, Vickery. None of those players are built like Sheridan. At the end of the day the importance of a props job lies in doing his bread and butter duties. Technique is key, and not height or chest size.
Benjamin said | August 21st 2008 @ 12:42am | Report comment
“The big difference is that we now have a specialist, full-time scrum coach in Michael Foley, who has been working with us for the past 18 months,” Baxter told the Cape Argus.
“All the hard work we’ve put in is coming to fruition, we’re getting results and things are going better than expected.”
Comparing the top front-rankers of the world right now, Baxter said that from a “…strength perspective there is probably not a massive difference as we all do the same weights and stuff.”
“But I think that previously, for the Wallabies, our technique was found wanting. The physio doubled up as a scrum coach and even though he was an ex-prop, he had to split his time between medical duties and coaching.
gavin said | August 21st 2008 @ 12:51am | Report comment
Foley couldn’t coach a choko vine over an outhouse
Benjamin said | August 21st 2008 @ 12:56am | Report comment
Well that’s handy because he’s off to coach the Waratahs. The point you seem to have missed is Baxter noting that all world props are of a similar strength, and that the difference in Australian front rowers to other front rowers lies in technique, and not, I stress NOT, physicality.
matta said | August 21st 2008 @ 1:00am | Report comment
Ben - Andy Sherridan was destroyed on the tour of NZ. I think his rep is way way overstated and is based on reports of his stregth and size.
Benjamin said | August 21st 2008 @ 1:06am | Report comment
I haven’t said at any point that Sheridan is a great prop. He is a powerhouse, and not a technician. However in no way did he get destroyed on that tour. The whole England scrum was outscrummed. It is an 8 man job after all. Matt Stevens was going back just as quick. Realistically Simon Shaw was missing and Sheridan had Borthwick behind him. A 6′5 17 stone weakling. That wasn’t Englands gun pack. As I have said, I am not a great fan of Sheridan however the only prop who he has got no real purchase off is Hayman and Castrogiovanni. He has basically destroyed every tighthead in Europe, SA and Australia.
ohtani's jacket said | August 21st 2008 @ 1:10am | Report comment
Sheridan is a great guy with a bright future. Hope he stays healthy.
Benjamin said | August 21st 2008 @ 3:21am | Report comment
I sometimes feel that perhaps Sheridan would be more effective were he to be a 2nd half sub, and that England give Payne or Stevens a 40 minute run and then unleash Sheridan for the last 40. Propping is seriously undermining his carrying game.