Roar Rookie
Joined March 2011
8.1k
Views
3
Published
3
Comments
Published
Comments
[caption id="attachment_16582" caption="Storm player Billy Slater skips away from Andrew McCullough during the Rugby League, NRL Round 2, Brisbane Broncos v Melbourne Storm at…
[caption id="attachment_41396" width="300" caption="Hawthorn players Cyril Rioli (33) and Lance Franklin celebrate a goal during the AFL Round 22 match between the Hawthorn Hawks…
Since 2003 my wife and I have made an annual pilgrimage to Boston, USA to visit our elder son, our daughter in law and…
Interesting points you make, Aidan. ‘…the coastal lifestyle which robs league of many promising players’ leaves me nonplussed, however. As does your comment that ‘a lot of players go on to play in the NRL’. I recall Bruce Olive leaving Casino All Blacks (yes, that was the name of the team!) to play for Newtown but the FNC was never renowned for supplying top grade players. I will admit, however, that I’ve been out of touch with details in many years and am open to rebuttal.
I respectfully suggest that you confuse predictability with inconsistency. A challenge for you : pen, paper and a full game, quantifying the number of 1-pass hitups. You might get a surprise. I tried it once but got bored witless after 15 minutes of the same tired old routine.
I would never seek to make a case for present rugby though I have played and enjoyed the game. Someone timed ball in play in a test v All Blacks some years ago and got 34 minutes out of 80 with the ball in play. There are still far too many reasons for poncing referees to gesture dramatically at some obscure breach of the rules and raise their arms in theatrical manner. Who gives a flying if a hand goes into a ruck or someone joins the fray from the side?
When I played Wests U18 in 1960 as a first curtain raiser to the main game Oakes Oval in Lismore would be packed, perhaps 5,000 fans. Venues in Ballina, Casino, Kyogle, Grafton, Murwillumbah and the like would have similar patronage for club games.
You’d be hard put to persuade me that league has such a following now on the FNC.
In passing, a combination of this site and Offsiders on ABC telly makes my week. I’ve written to ABC asking for Offsiders to be extended to an hour. Why not make a similar request to put the acid on the buggers?
John
Isn't Rugby League meant to be dead?
shobster needs only visit his local library and take out a dozen books on cricket history. I encourage him to do so. A couple of books on the 1948 tour of England would not go astray.
DG Bradman played his cricket over some 20 years, through the Great Depression and then suffered interruption during WW2. He not only had to endure uncovered pitches. There were no lighting towers when the light became dim. There were no helmets or computer- weighted bats. Consider even the comparison between sight screens then and now. And consider playing conditions then and now. And conditions of travel, practice, accommodation, pay (‘pay?)
Inferior fielding? Bradman was a fine fielder and excellent throw. The Likes of Neil Harvey and Keith Miller weren’t too bad, either.
I’m personally happy to let averages speak for themselves : Bradman then daylight. Having said that, I admire the skill, artistry and endurance of Tendulkar, a remarkable sportsman by any standard. I also know how Tendulkar would answer the question being debated here. And he would answer in all humility. He would be embarrassed at being talked of in the same terms as DG Bradman.
Incidentally, in Roland Perry’s book ‘Bradman’s Best’ Tendulkar is included in The Don’s team, the best ever in the view of the man that Richie Benaud spoke of thus : ‘Sir Donald was the best selector I came across in the game anywhere in the world, not just Australia’. At the beginning of the chapter on Tendulkar, Steve Waugh is quoted thus : ‘Take away Bradman, and (Tendulkar’s) next up, I reckon’.
Bradman described ‘Tiger’ O’Reilly as the best bowler he had ever faced. I’d loved to have seen Tendulkar facing ‘Tiger’.
Comparisons are probably impossible across different eras. There is no harm in having the debate but rationality needs to prevail.
John B
Cricket has-been
Victoria
Sachin Tendulkar and Don Bradman: no comparison
An afterthought on the league kickoff.
In the 50s the norm was a short kickoff that had to travel, from dim memory, 10 yards. It generally went in the direction of the forward pack which was aligned 3-2-1 with the halfback standing not too far from the lock. The theory was that if the kickoff went high enough it would provide (ideally) a 50% chance for the attacking team get through and to regain possession.
The long kickoff is now the norm. I can but suppose that its rationale is for the opposition to drop the ball and provide an opportunity close to their line. The % rate of catching seems to be pretty good, most catchers even remembering the old adage about keeping the elbows together when taking a high ball (and in rugby, about preventing a downward rip by the opposition).
Why is the short kickoff so rarely used in league in ‘the modern game’? It doesn’t have to be in the direction of the pack. It can be towards the backs. It can involve subtleties as well. A clever half back in the 50s could kickoff striking the top part of the ball, ensuring ‘bounce, bounce, bounce, high pop’ for charging forwards to take advantage of.
I’ll stick to my view that league is boringly predictable in its patterns of play. A Billy Slater can make a difference, admittedly (see my post on him elsewhere and comment, please) but there are too few of his class around.
Isn't Rugby League meant to be dead?