S
St Helens RLFC
Guest
No, exactly the same.
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
R
Ripper
Guest
So let me guess this straight...
The So Called Working Class Game of League isnt in the Working Class Schools?
The So Called Working Class Game of League isnt in the Working Class Schools?
S
St Helens RLFC
Guest
It definately is...
R
Ripper
Guest
Here Just Nobody Plays or cares about League
N
NZL Fan
Guest
Lets look at the real facts.............
A few things
1.For one the Super 12 has always competed directly against NRL, always has always will..........
Super 12 (regardless of when it starts/finishes) has always been compared to NRL (thats why Brad Thorn, Matt Rogers are always asked what comp. is tougher/superior) - if you believe otherwise then you live up to your name......
Dragon fool - 0 NZL fan - 1
2.Your ignorance shines through here my friend - you say rugby union had a 200-300 year start on rugby league????????? If your head wasn't up your butt in the dark so much you'd know that rugby union hasn't had much of a start on rugby league interms of time......
dragon fool 0 - NZL fan -2
3.Along with International league tests, state of origin is the highest level of competition in the code (rated even higher then International league by most). To compare fairly you then compare it to the highest level of competition in rugby union - ie. International test footy (still with me???)
Dragon fool "You are talking about level of play I am talking of how it is. Its how it is mate live with it"
Mate that was a convincing retort - strike three to me...........
Dragon tool: 0 NZL fan - 3
4.Warriors, storm, Raiders and Brisbane broncos are practically "state/city" sides under the guise of "club"
HAHA. Warriors represent Auckland just like its NPC equivalent whereas the Blues are a "Franchise" run off the NPC side. Raiders represent Canberra a city of 300,000 people. There are more than that in the St George area Canberra mate isn't very big. Brisbane a state team? Heard of North Qld Cowboys mate. Ignorant fool.
Read again my brain-dead friend, I said "state/city" side - last time I looked at the map Brisbane was a city...........The Warriors took the "Auckland" out of their name so as to be a "New Zealand" team that all new Zealand could support. The Warriors therefore represent a whole country...........hardly comparable to NPC isn't it???????
Dragon tool - zip NZL fan - 4
5.However the lamest part of your post is the end where you basically say 90 odd years hasn't been enough time for league to grow in popularity..........give me a break.......and how it is "making huge progress in other parts of the world" - where exactly again????
Singapore
USA
Ireland,
Scotland
France
Fiji
PNG
Canada
Lebanon
Moldova
South Africa
Russia
Malta
Enough??? Sure it's not as big as Union but that 2-300 year start really did seem to help.
Even for you this is scraping the bottom of the barrel, I can't help looking at those names and just laughing...........
Dragon fool - 0 NZL fan 5!
Read em and weep.............
A few things
1.For one the Super 12 has always competed directly against NRL, always has always will..........
Super 12 (regardless of when it starts/finishes) has always been compared to NRL (thats why Brad Thorn, Matt Rogers are always asked what comp. is tougher/superior) - if you believe otherwise then you live up to your name......
Dragon fool - 0 NZL fan - 1
2.Your ignorance shines through here my friend - you say rugby union had a 200-300 year start on rugby league????????? If your head wasn't up your butt in the dark so much you'd know that rugby union hasn't had much of a start on rugby league interms of time......
dragon fool 0 - NZL fan -2
3.Along with International league tests, state of origin is the highest level of competition in the code (rated even higher then International league by most). To compare fairly you then compare it to the highest level of competition in rugby union - ie. International test footy (still with me???)
Dragon fool "You are talking about level of play I am talking of how it is. Its how it is mate live with it"
Mate that was a convincing retort - strike three to me...........
Dragon tool: 0 NZL fan - 3
4.Warriors, storm, Raiders and Brisbane broncos are practically "state/city" sides under the guise of "club"
HAHA. Warriors represent Auckland just like its NPC equivalent whereas the Blues are a "Franchise" run off the NPC side. Raiders represent Canberra a city of 300,000 people. There are more than that in the St George area Canberra mate isn't very big. Brisbane a state team? Heard of North Qld Cowboys mate. Ignorant fool.
Read again my brain-dead friend, I said "state/city" side - last time I looked at the map Brisbane was a city...........The Warriors took the "Auckland" out of their name so as to be a "New Zealand" team that all new Zealand could support. The Warriors therefore represent a whole country...........hardly comparable to NPC isn't it???????
Dragon tool - zip NZL fan - 4
5.However the lamest part of your post is the end where you basically say 90 odd years hasn't been enough time for league to grow in popularity..........give me a break.......and how it is "making huge progress in other parts of the world" - where exactly again????
Singapore
USA
Ireland,
Scotland
France
Fiji
PNG
Canada
Lebanon
Moldova
South Africa
Russia
Malta
Enough??? Sure it's not as big as Union but that 2-300 year start really did seem to help.
Even for you this is scraping the bottom of the barrel, I can't help looking at those names and just laughing...........
Dragon fool - 0 NZL fan 5!
Read em and weep.............
W
Wally
Guest
I was replying to what holc had to say.
D
Dragon Fanatic
Guest
1. Caught you out there mate competed against and compared to are two different things. You said they were "competed directly against " each other where I pointed out clearly that they didn't as they are two different competitons. You cannot compare an 11 round competition between states and franchises from three different countries to a 26 round competition with 10 of the competing clubs being in NSW, two from Qld, one from the ACT, one from Victoria and one from Auckland. How you can compare the South Sydney district to say the NSW Waratahs is beyond me.
ME-1 You-0
2.My ignorance! I thought you were a Union boy, Rugby has been around unofficailly since the 1500's and it spread around the world during this time. In the early 1800's the English RFU was formed but the game was already spread around the world.
ME-2 You-0
3.Mate I agree with you that the level of play between the NRL and S12 is of similar quality. But what I am saying is that in no way can you compare the NRL to the S12 because they are grossly different competitions there is no way you can camopare the South Sydney Rabbitohs or the Cronulla Sutherland sharks to the NSW Waratahs or the QLD Reds.
Agree to disagree about this one.
4.They represent the whole country yet play out of Auckland?
Sorry champ.
Me-3 You-0
5."Even for you this is scraping the bottom of the barrel, I can't help looking at those names and just laughing..........."
Where's your argument? Great rebuttle.
Me-4 You-0
G
Gay-Guy
Guest
Hmmmmmmmmmmm...very interesting.Originally posted by Dragon Fanatic+Jul 25 2004, 02:12 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dragon Fanatic @ Jul 25 2004, 02:12 PM)</div>1. Caught you out there mate competed against and compared to are two different things. You said they were "competed directly against " each other where I pointed out clearly that they didn't as they are two different competitons. You cannot compare an 11 round competition between states and franchises from three different countries to a 26 round competition with 10 of the competing clubs being in NSW, two from Qld, one from the ACT, one from Victoria and one from Auckland. How you can compare the South Sydney district to say the NSW Waratahs is beyond me.
ME-1 You-0
2.My ignorance! I thought you were a Union boy, Rugby has been around unofficailly since the 1500's and it spread around the world during this time. In the early 1800's the English RFU was formed but the game was already spread around the world.
ME-2 You-0
3.Mate I agree with you that the level of play between the NRL and S12 is of similar quality. But what I am saying is that in no way can you compare the NRL to the S12 because they are grossly different competitions there is no way you can camopare the South Sydney Rabbitohs or the Cronulla Sutherland sharks to the NSW Waratahs or the QLD Reds.
Agree to disagree about this one.
4.They represent the whole country yet play out of Auckland?
Sorry champ.
Me-3 You-0
5."Even for you this is scraping the bottom of the barrel, I can't help looking at those names and just laughing..........."
Where's your argument? Great rebuttle.
Me-4 You-0 [/b]
Any footnotes showing evidence or stuff for all this?
R
Ripper
Guest
Its not ok to compare Cronulla Sharks to NSW Waratahs, but its ok too compare the New Zealand Warriors too the Auckland NPC Team?
G
Gay-Guy
Guest
Good point. Hmmmmmmmmm...you're on today!
D
Dragon Fanatic
Guest
Hmmm good point. But as I said they are in essence the Auckland Warriors, they play out of Auckland, there administration and leagues club is in Auckland but their name is the New Zealand Warriors for basically patriot crowd support, so why can't they be as a club compared to an NPC team??
N
NZL Fan
Guest
Dragon fool:"2.My ignorance! I thought you were a Union boy, Rugby has been around unofficailly since the 1500's and it spread around the world during this time. In the early 1800's the English RFU was formed but the game was already spread around the world.
Sit down, take a deep breath, and let me explain the facts to you.
Here in essence is a very quick history of the two codes. Rugby union/rugby league was once the same game, hence any history before the "great split" of 1895 is a "shared history" of the two games. Therefore there is relatively little or no difference in the amount of time the two codes have had in improving their popularity. The game being played prior to the 1800's developed into what is now called "association football" (ie. soccer), which has no resemblance to rugby of either code. The so called "picking up with the ball and running with it" by William webb at rugby school, only supposidly happened in the early 1800s.
The first game of rugby union ever played in New Zealand (whose national team is the most successful in the history of rugby union) was in 1870, so I hardly think that rugby union had been spread around the world prior to that time (and definitely not in any period before the 1800's).
These are the straight facts - so if you are going to post arguments of substance, at least tell the truth...........
Sit down, take a deep breath, and let me explain the facts to you.
Here in essence is a very quick history of the two codes. Rugby union/rugby league was once the same game, hence any history before the "great split" of 1895 is a "shared history" of the two games. Therefore there is relatively little or no difference in the amount of time the two codes have had in improving their popularity. The game being played prior to the 1800's developed into what is now called "association football" (ie. soccer), which has no resemblance to rugby of either code. The so called "picking up with the ball and running with it" by William webb at rugby school, only supposidly happened in the early 1800s.
The first game of rugby union ever played in New Zealand (whose national team is the most successful in the history of rugby union) was in 1870, so I hardly think that rugby union had been spread around the world prior to that time (and definitely not in any period before the 1800's).
These are the straight facts - so if you are going to post arguments of substance, at least tell the truth...........
S
St Helens RLFC
Guest
Apart from the 70 years of oppression the RFU has laid on the RFL, which DEFINATELY had an impact on the spread of the game in the Northern Hemisphere.
D
Dragon Fanatic
Guest
How can you argue that the games history is shared? Yes the split happened in 1895 but if you haven't realised yet the games are very different and the shared code played the rules of Rugby Union which are different to the rules of Rugby League if you hadn't noticed.
By the way you only seemed to refute one of my points looks like I win.
By the way you only seemed to refute one of my points looks like I win.
N
NZL Fan
Guest
In fact all your points have been easily refuted in earlier posts by ripper, myself and others (you're probably having trouble understanding the English in those), and on other threads related to this one...........Originally posted by Dragon Fanatic@Jul 26 2004, 07:38 PM
How can you argue that the games history is shared? Yes the split happened in 1895 but if you haven't realised yet the games are very different and the shared code played the rules of Rugby Union which are different to the rules of Rugby League if you hadn't noticed.
By the way you only seemed to refute one of my points looks like I win.
5-0 NZL fan (and others having to waste time refuting silly posts).............
And just to refute your latest silly post, the game prior to the big "split" hardly reflected the game of rugby union of today either, and if you read my post fully you will see that rugby earlier was played under the basic rules of soccer, hardly being played like rugby union then don't you think?? (sorry I forgot, you DON'T think
W
wigan_rlfc
Guest
No it isn't.
A public School is a Private school (as in Union players are public schoolboys)
A state school (state comprehensive) is Run by the government
R
Ripper
Guest
Well either way you still havent got a replied about my point about why the ''state schools'' as you like to call them in Wellington dont have League Teams, despite the fact League has apparnetly been "strong'' in NZ for 90 years
C
captainamerica
Guest
Sorry I've been away since I made the 1895 post to educate Dragon.Originally posted by NZL fan+Jul 27 2004, 07:44 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NZL fan @ Jul 27 2004, 07:44 AM)</div>In fact all your points have been easily refuted in earlier posts by ripper, myself and others (you're probably having trouble understanding the English in those), and on other threads related to this one...........@Jul 26 2004, 07:38 PM
How can you argue that the games history is shared? Yes the split happened in 1895 but if you haven't realised yet the games are very different and the shared code played the rules of Rugby Union which are different to the rules of Rugby League if you hadn't noticed.
By the way you only seemed to refute one of my points looks like I win.
5-0 NZL fan (and others having to waste time refuting silly posts).............
And just to refute your latest silly post, the game prior to the big "split" hardly reflected the game of rugby union of today either, and if you read my post fully you will see that rugby earlier was played under the basic rules of soccer, hardly being played like rugby union then don't you think?? (sorry I forgot, you DON'T think)...........[/b]
Thank you NZL Fan.
The scoreboard has broken on account of us having entirely too many points. There is, however, a blind man wearing a Dragon's shirt and he's holding two signs: one reads; 'Will work for food;' The other is Dragon's score: 'Nought.'
In all seriousness, Dragons, I would have hated to play rugby in the mid 19th century. Utter chaos. Different schools had different rules involving number of players, and even whether or not you could pick up the ball. Madness. Thank god for evolution.
And repression . . .
As this is The Great Debate I'd like to toss another coin in the bucket: Will the English League fans shut up about being repressed in the past? You loved every minute of it. It gave you something else to complain about other than the weather and Yanks coming over and taking your women during WWII (and when I was last there).
C
Canadian_Rugby_Guy
Guest
Silence in the thread as nobody has anything to say anymore.
S
St Helens RLFC
Guest
Captain America tends to have that effect.... Captain Trouble Maker, more like!
