“When rugby turned professional so many more people were exposed to the game. the league types became scared. Voss, Goguld, the daily terror or began to knock rugby out of fear. this made people choose a side instead of being able to support both.”

This is quite possibly the most ludicrous analysis of the rugby union – rugby league ‘divide’ I have ever seen.

Quite a feat given all the cross code jibberish on the net. Well done on reaching new depths.

Thanks JimC.

The comparison with the RU backs is interesting. I can’t say I pay much attention to the 15-man game but even the sucessful English team of the early-mid 2000s seem to be dominated by pretty staid outside backs (Robinson aside). Not that they needed brilliant outside backs to be sucessful.

The playing stock is only part of the story though. With their solid forward pack England should have done better against the Aussies in over the last decade. Too often they’ve been woefully off the pace, tactically and perhaps psychologically. The constant procession of halves pairings is a case in point. They have some injury issues this time around but I can’t remember the English playing the same halves pairing in consecutive games against the Aussies at any time since the 2003 Ashes series – maybe earlier. Even in the 2004 trinations tournament – in which they topped the talbe after the group games – they were farting around with their halves combination with Maguire, Harris and others. And for this game they’ve made something like 11 positional changes. Apparently the coaching staff still think that the solution to not having a particularly strong outside back combination is to shuffle the names and positions around as often as possible until you chance onto something that works.

Meanwhile the players are all still trying to convince themselves that the Aussies aren’t superhuman – witness Burgess and Ellis with statements to that effect today. Well here’s a little secret: the Aussies actually aren’t all that accomplished at playing test footy and have often underperformed at this level. Many times over the last 5 or 6 years they’ve been gifted games when NZ and England have just self-combusted. On the rare occassion that their opponents show enough nous and defensive grit to stay in the game the Roos can struggle. Sure, they’ve pulled off some great tight wins like in the 2006 Trinations prelims and final, and even under pressure in the 4N final last year. But for every one of them there is a 2008 world cup final, or a 2009 4N first round against the Kiwis, or a 2006 Aus v England in Sydney. After a decade of winning most games by simply waiting for their opponents to wilt, the Kangaroos often get rattled when someone sticks with them.

If England can do the little things right – read and defuse the simple decoy plays, kick well, not give away too many easy penalties or dropped balls – they’ll make a game of it. History suggests that these little things will be their undoing, though.

Ben S, I don’t see why the comparison between the record of the home nations in RU against the All Blacks (the best team in the world) and England’s record against the Kangaroos (the best team in the world) isn’t valid. England have a poor record against Australia, no doubting that. But it isn’t that bad – only marginally worse in win/loss terms over the last decade than the English RU team, which has far more resources at its disposal. And Ireland, Wales, Scotland haven’t beaten the All Blacks for decades (has Ireland ever beaten them?). The point is a basic one: England’s record isn’t great, but it could be worse.

Agree on the second part of your comment. The team namede for the Australia game today is weak. Yet another new halves combination – with O’Loughlin at 6. Shuffling the deckchairs.

Dean – Surry Hills – I think this is one of those cases where naming names in a public forum isn’t such a good idea at this stage…

Luke – think you are missing a trick with Soward. He’s certainly been quieter this year in terms of key attacking stats. But his kicking game is what lets the Dragons play the way they do, and that has never been as evident as it was on Saturday night v the Tigers, as I argue here: http://www.footyfootyfooty.com/2010/09/difference.html

Matt, totally understand the frustration with aspects of the coverage of RL (on and off the field), but the suggestion of some mass media conspiracy against the sport is more than a little overblown IMO.

The Sydney/Brisbane press love sensationalist RL headlines because people in Sydney and Brisbane love reading them.

That doesn’t appear to be the same for AFL in Melbourne, but you know what? I’d rather have open press coverage of the game than the insular heads up bums stuff they appear to get with Aussie rules in Melbourne.

Presumably the Melbourne press a) are so embedded with the AFL and clubs that they are terrified of reporting openly and b) have decided that the myrmidonian AFL public can’t cope with the concept of a negative story about its sport of choice.

RL fans should be bigger than that.

Saints fans. Getting nervous. It must be September.

Thanks for the numbers Whites. Pretty positive reading for the NRL, as usual!

Seeing as you are the TV ratings guru around here, want to venture a prediction for Tigers v Saints on Sat night? I can’t remember what Dogs v Eels got in Sydney last year (or Tigers v Saints in 2005 for that matter) but you’d have to think it will give that figure a nudge…

I think you have the right reading of Brady’s comments Beowulf. I’m surprised that people are reacting negatively. He’s emphasising that any expansion club will need a great business case, and for the cirucmstances to be right for expansion, the NRL needs to have medium term revenues locked in. On those bases, any well organised, excellent bids will be a great chance of getting into the competition when the next TV rights deal is through, and any bid that isn’t quite there yet won’t.

That is as it should be, as far as I’m concerned. We all want new teams in, but without a strong business case there is no point rushing them through. Just look at some of the dramas the A-League is having.

Garbage Gobbo. Tigers have consistently been in the top two or three biggest drawing Sydney NRL teams for the last 6 years (we’ve made the finals twice over that period, some winning streak).

Our memebership number isn’t great. One of the reasons for that is the fact that we play home games at three different grounds that are a long way apart (although as a ticketed member who lives 300 plus kms away from all of our grounds I don’t have a lot of sympathy for that excuse.) But if you look at home attendances (and away crowds for that matter) it’s clear that the Tigers are now playing with the big boys as far as Sydney goes. As they should be.

You’re right Mitch, this is going to be a cracker. 2005 all over again – the Saints will be heavy favourites with the burden of expectations, the Tigers a bit of a wildcard who have done very well to get to this point (particularly considering the circumstances over the last two weeks!). Will be very interesting to see whether Saints can square the ledger!

The atmosphere at this match up in 2005 at the SFS was absolutely amazing. ANZ will struggle to match that but with 60 or 70K it will still be a great night.

ptovey01, agree about the attraction of the big games at the SFS. Saturday night was amazing, but atmosphere wise, Saints v Tigers there in 2005 was just insane. Helped by a far better outcome from a Tigers point of view.

Hopefully the Tigers can scrape through for a rematch, but I can’t see them getting past Canberra on Friday.

There have definitely been a few painful ones recently. Bad late season losses to the Knights cost us finals spots in 2004 and 2007. Ditto Eels and Titans in 2009. Those bloody Souths games in 2009 and 2010, and now this. Not to mention a bunch of extremely tight wins this year. They certainly keep you on the edge of your seat. I’m just glad I’m young enough not to have to worry about my ticker…although, at this rate…

Bugger that. I wanted them to call it off after the first 5 minutes of extra time. Absolute emotional rollercoaster. The crowd was literally on its feet for the last 15 minutes of the game. Amazing night.

Yeah, the trickle of union fans going the other way was an odd sight, wasn’t it Gary. Still, there’s no accounting for taste.

I can’t see us bouncing back against the Raiders, assuming the Dragons get up. Physically, you might do it, even with the injuries. Emotionally, I’m not so sure. But hopefully we take something from the game in the longer term. As I said in the article, for a good portion of the game, it was the best I’ve ever seen a Tigers team play. They didn’t give in when it got tough despite the Roosters gaining the momentum. The forwards were unbelievably brave. And I thought Robert Lui came of age last night. It just wasn’t enough in the end.

Can’t agree with you there Fisher Price.

I was on the hill at a packed Campbelltown earlier this year when we played the Roosters. Guess what? They beat us in a thriller.

Home ground advantage only goes so far. Our record at the SFS is solid. It is a home ground. It was a majority Tigers crowd. We were up 15 – 2. And you want to have a dig at the CEO?

Choosing the SFS as a finals venue over the romantic lure of a packed Leichhardt or Campbelltown is a mark of the solid administration which has transformed the Tigers from the joke of the league to a serious off and on field contender over the last 5 years.

Cheers Dean. Some additional thoughts on the game here if you are interested: http://www.footyfootyfooty.com/2010/09/some-extra-thoughts-on-tigers-v.html

On the McIntyre system, I don’t have a problem with it, even if the Tigers are unlucky and do go out today.

In a comp as even as this one not alot separates 3 and 4 from 5 and 6 and the rest. As far as I’m concerned, if you’re not in the top two, you haven’t earned a guaranteed second bite. This is finals footy. You have to win. The Tigers deserve to be there, but sometimes that isn’t enough in the big league.

In his own words Greg said that there were still “a number of boxes to tick” with the bid.

If anyone is interested the full transcript of my chat with him is available here: http://www.footyfootyfooty.com/2010/08/interview-with-greg-florimo-on-central.html

As is a more detailed examination of the Bears’ bid: http://www.footyfootyfooty.com/p/central-coast-bears.html

I agree with you JF – the east coast is where the population is at, and going to Gosford would be a big part of the NRL catering to that.

But it doesn’t hurt to have broader ambitions geographically.

Beowulf – agree on the additional benefit of bringing back the Bears. Obviously that is one of the factors that goes into the equation.

Equally you could note that a Gosford team won’t give the NRL a couple of things it does want (increased national exposure, another option for live Qld team telecasts, another TV timeslot), and does give the NRL one of the things it already has plenty of – NSW teams with realistic hopes of averaging in the mid to high teens, crowds wise.

‘m not coming down on one side or the other – I think that on the merits there are very pressing claims from a number of places, Gosford included. Personally, I’d love to see the Bears running around again.

For anyone interested we’re currently pulling together a consolidated piece on the Bears bid at http://www.footyfootyfooty.com – check back later this week or early next week and see what you think.

So they’re playing a form of rugby league because of their interest in rugby union?

Fine by me.

Thanks Aaron, good read.

Participation numbers are always an interesting topic and pretty fuzzy around the edges. I wonder how many people there are in Australia playing in formal Oztag and touch football competitions? Both games are essentially non-contact forms of rugby league.

For that matter, I wonder how many people there are playing “tag rugby” in places like Ireland who would profess to have no working knowledge of or interest in rugby league?

Redb, who said anything about countering Rovers (or GWS) crowds?

I think the Rovers will do well. They ought to given how popular soccer is in the western suburbs. Although like the AFL team I think they’ll have real problems developing a whole-of-western-sydney identity (as opposed to a strong more localised following somewhere in the West).

The Rovers have talked about representing the area from Menai-Liverpool-Campbelltown up to the north-west and out to the mountains. Somewhat more fancifully the AFL seems to be pushing the notion of some western Sydney-Wollongong-Canberra ‘triangle’. This is the big advantage the NRL has on the ground out west – they’ve got the whole joint covered already in a way a single franchise will find almost impossible to match, ever. And as this article suggests there are plenty of things the NRL could be doing to ram this advantage home.

Mitch, I think you could play it before Origin. Early in the season – say rounds 3, 4, 5. (Although like a lot of people I’d lean towards having Origins played on stand alone weekends to avoid having the best players missing during from big club games).

The beauty of a competition like this is that it could run without interfering with the NRL competition itself – you would just have to nudge the draw for the four clubs invovled around a little bit. It gives you the attraction of a series of early season (almost conference style) derby round and still maintains the integrity of the broader comp.

Good article Rob.

In particular the derby round idea is something a lot of fans have been pushing for for some time, and should be firmly in mind when the decisions are being made about where to expand the competition. We’ll be doing a bit on this on our blog shortly if anyone is interested.

On Humphreys and co, most of the better CEOs are happy to get back to fans (particularly members) if you contact them through club email addys. If you do manage to get through to Humphreys you may want to go a bit easy on criticising some of the ideas published in the Daily Tele though – he has actually proposed a lot of them (eg 60 minute games).

I think the point about Farah overplaying his hand is fair enough Danno. In his limited chances at rep level so far that is exactly what he has done.

Not so sure that applies at club level though. If anything this year Farah hasn’t been trying on enough. And as I said above I’d argue that the best way to get your most talented hooker in tune with the rest of the state team is to have him playing in the state team.

As for the Wests outside backs not enjoying playing outside Farah and Marshall – I’m sure the ad lib sideways play does get a bit frustrating. However its hard to imagine guys like Lawrence and Tuiaki / Tuqiri having too much of a problem with how they ballplayers play given the amount of breaks and tries they’ve had served up on a platter over the last year or two.