Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
The League and Union Overlap
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="gingergenius" data-source="post: 469695" data-attributes="member: 33219"><p>Because Union <em>used </em>to be a very stuffy sport, strictly anti-professional and therefore considered any player who 'sold his soul' for money to be traitorous. What Davies, Gibbs, Bateman etc. did is exactly the same as the majority of League-Union converts nowadays. You get a few situations where the player has had a background in Union and genuinely wants to play it, but usually cross-code conversions are money related.</p><p></p><p>It was blinkered of union to sneer at the Welsh converts of the 90s, but that's now in the past. If League fans can't get over that, then that's their problem.</p><p></p><p>For people who say the two games are completely different, I think that's ********. And if you want evidence, look at probably the most talented British club side, of either code, ever - Wigan of the 90s. We have Jason Robinson, Andy Farrell, Henry Paul, Va'aiga Tuigamala who were all dual code internationals. We have Martin Offiah who came to League from Union. Gary Connolly went to Union from League. And we have Shaun Edwards, a hugely successful Union coach (Farrell has also had some success in his early coaching career). Not to mention the likes of Quinnell. Most of the team has some connection with Union. The fact that both Wigan and Bradford have won the Middlesex sevens suggests that the two are far from different.</p><p></p><p>Instead of 'completely different', I'd make the analogy of Test and 20/20 cricket. Both involve bowlers bowling at batsmen. But 20/20 cricket is much more one-dimensional (and arguably more exciting because of it). Players must hone and practice specific skills in this game, and produce some wonderful plays. Some 20/20 players also excel at Test cricket, others are 20/20 specialists.</p><p></p><p>Replace 20/20 with RL there and it's still true.</p><p></p><p>Test cricket has very few artificial rules, because the overs are not limited, and there are no fielding restrictions.</p><p>Rugby Union has very few too, because tackles are not limited, and possession is contested at all times.</p><p>Extraordinary flair shots are more likely in T20; extraordinary examples of flair are more likely in League.</p><p>Compelling battles between a batsman and a bowler are able to develop in Tests but not T20. Compelling battles between props in a scrum, or 7s at the breakdown, do not occur in League.</p><p></p><p>That's just my theory. I love both forms of cricket, but prefer Tests. I love both codes of rugby, but prefer Union. Neither is better or worse, just different depending on what you get out of a sport.</p><p></p><p>And so, with regards to overlapping the sports, they have for the last 20 years, I don't see why this shouldn't continue. Cross-code games are gimmicky, but cross-code relations are still important, in the fight against the hegemony of football. We must be grateful that there are some bastions of the North where the round ball is still second choice. And both might well benefit from extra fans - true fans of the sport of rugby who can appreciate a free-flowing contact footy whether the players have mullets and snug shorts or posh accents and beer bellies.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="gingergenius, post: 469695, member: 33219"] Because Union [I]used [/I]to be a very stuffy sport, strictly anti-professional and therefore considered any player who 'sold his soul' for money to be traitorous. What Davies, Gibbs, Bateman etc. did is exactly the same as the majority of League-Union converts nowadays. You get a few situations where the player has had a background in Union and genuinely wants to play it, but usually cross-code conversions are money related. It was blinkered of union to sneer at the Welsh converts of the 90s, but that's now in the past. If League fans can't get over that, then that's their problem. For people who say the two games are completely different, I think that's ********. And if you want evidence, look at probably the most talented British club side, of either code, ever - Wigan of the 90s. We have Jason Robinson, Andy Farrell, Henry Paul, Va'aiga Tuigamala who were all dual code internationals. We have Martin Offiah who came to League from Union. Gary Connolly went to Union from League. And we have Shaun Edwards, a hugely successful Union coach (Farrell has also had some success in his early coaching career). Not to mention the likes of Quinnell. Most of the team has some connection with Union. The fact that both Wigan and Bradford have won the Middlesex sevens suggests that the two are far from different. Instead of 'completely different', I'd make the analogy of Test and 20/20 cricket. Both involve bowlers bowling at batsmen. But 20/20 cricket is much more one-dimensional (and arguably more exciting because of it). Players must hone and practice specific skills in this game, and produce some wonderful plays. Some 20/20 players also excel at Test cricket, others are 20/20 specialists. Replace 20/20 with RL there and it's still true. Test cricket has very few artificial rules, because the overs are not limited, and there are no fielding restrictions. Rugby Union has very few too, because tackles are not limited, and possession is contested at all times. Extraordinary flair shots are more likely in T20; extraordinary examples of flair are more likely in League. Compelling battles between a batsman and a bowler are able to develop in Tests but not T20. Compelling battles between props in a scrum, or 7s at the breakdown, do not occur in League. That's just my theory. I love both forms of cricket, but prefer Tests. I love both codes of rugby, but prefer Union. Neither is better or worse, just different depending on what you get out of a sport. And so, with regards to overlapping the sports, they have for the last 20 years, I don't see why this shouldn't continue. Cross-code games are gimmicky, but cross-code relations are still important, in the fight against the hegemony of football. We must be grateful that there are some bastions of the North where the round ball is still second choice. And both might well benefit from extra fans - true fans of the sport of rugby who can appreciate a free-flowing contact footy whether the players have mullets and snug shorts or posh accents and beer bellies. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
The League and Union Overlap
Top