• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

20/20 Rugby League?

chaminda_00

Hall of Fame Member
I do find it rather ironic Tharmi that you're using Goodes as an example of someone with skill, when his biggest attributes in the midfield are his size, strength and speed...
Yeah but there are plenty of players with similar size, strenght and speed, especially now with the flood of these players being recruited. But it is his skill level that makes him better then most.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
There are others that are better them my Swans boys. But the point still stands that AFL has continual got more boring to watch, due to lack of players like Hodge coming through.

If you guys ever take off your one-eyed AFL glasses you will see it as well.
Some might argue the Swans did a lot TO make AFL boring.

Seriously if you want to watch Barry Hall beat someone up, go watch boxing or something.

And seriously I reckon I could name 50 more skilled and classy players than O'Loughlin. O'Loughlin is a good player (underrated here in Melb), but don't mention him with class in the same sentence.
 

chaminda_00

Hall of Fame Member
Some might argue the Swans did a lot TO make AFL boring.

Seriously if you want to watch Barry Hall beat someone up, go watch boxing or something.

And seriously I reckon I could name 50 more skilled and classy players than O'Loughlin. O'Loughlin is a good player (underrated here in Melb), but don't mention him with class in the same sentence.
No doubt the way the Swans play now, has made the game look very boring. But really they just made the most of trend that was creaping into AFL for a couple seasons.

As I said before there are a lot better players with more class then O'Loughin. But if you think there is 50, then that just shows how under rated he is in Melbourne.

As I said before I would watch am AFL match to watch players like with class like Judd, Albert and Brown run around. Not really watch Hall knock some guys out. But unforunetly there are less and less of these players coming through. Anyone who doesn't have a one-eyed view of AFL can see that.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
No doubt the way the Swans play now, has made the game look very boring. But really they just made the most of trend that was creaping into AFL for a couple seasons.

As I said before there are a lot better players with more class then O'Loughin. But if you think there is 50, then that just shows how under rated he is in Melbourne.

As I said before I would watch am AFL match to watch players like with class like Judd, Albert and Brown run around. Not really watch Hall knock some guys out. But unforunetly there are less and less of these players coming through. Anyone who doesn't have a one-eyed view of AFL can see that.
I don't get it, what players are coming through then?

You criticise AFL for not being tough any more, yet you don't watch AFL for Hall, so who is it that you don't like watching?

Look at the recent draft picks. Marc Murphy, Adam Cooney, Trent Cotchin, Joel Selwood and Rhys Palmer... they're all not typical athletes, they're in and under players with skill, class and tough at the ball attitude.

I'm assuming you know who they are btw, if you don't watch AFL that's fine, but don't peg it when there's more class and skill in modern day players than ever. Its the toughness and physical ways that have gone out of the game.

That's why your women's tennis comparison doesn't work. Strength and power has never been less important, rather than being more important nowadays. Speed and skill are what players need, otherwise they just don't get selected. No more blue collar players like your Jason Johnson and Toby Liberatore. Not many more anyway.
 
Last edited:

chaminda_00

Hall of Fame Member
I don't get it, what players are coming through then?

You criticise AFL for not being tough any more, yet you don't watch AFL for Hall, so who is it that you don't like watching?

Look at the recent draft picks. Marc Murphy, Adam Cooney, Trent Cotchin, Joel Selwood and Rhys Palmer... they're all not typical athletes, they're in and under players with skill, class and tough at the ball attitude.

I'm assuming you know who they are btw, if you don't watch AFL that's fine, but don't peg it when there's more class and skill in modern day players than ever. Its the toughness and physical ways that have gone out of the game.

That's why your women's tennis comparison doesn't work. Strength and power has never been less important, rather than being more important nowadays. Speed and skill are what players need, otherwise they just don't get selected. No more blue collar players like your Jason Johnson and Toby Liberatore. Not many more anyway.
Yeah there are still some players coming through like the ones you listed. But for every one of those players there is two or three players that picked mainly on atheltic ability over greater skill players.

Speed and endurance might be more important now then strength and power, as every 2nd player has that now. But overall IMO there is lack of skill coming through. There is a lot more athetics coming through the draft system, then just pure AFL players with just raw skills.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
And the pure athletes don't last, but the players that have both aspects (your Judd, your Goodes, your Ablett) succeed.

Richmond picked up a guy named Jarrod Oakley Nicholls with their highest pick in the 2006 draft, purely because of his athletic ability.

He's an absolute dud and couldn't last because of his lack of skill.
 

chaminda_00

Hall of Fame Member
And the pure athletes don't last, but the players that have both aspects (your Judd, your Goodes, your Ablett) succeed.

Richmond picked up a guy named Jarrod Oakley Nicholls with their highest pick in the 2006 draft, purely because of his athletic ability.

He's an absolute dud and couldn't last because of his lack of skill.
There are more few pure athetes is relative decent AFL skills that have lasted and taken places of guys with better skills. Which has made the game worse to watch IMO, then what it was in the past.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
You've really gotta start naming names, because over the last 10 posts you've spoted general stuff without ONE name, other than your barometers of Barry "I couldn't kick a goal in the 2006 GF from 10m in front"Hall and Michael "I'm so skilled but I couldn't kick straight in the last quarter of the 2005 Grand Final" O'Loughlin.

Note: I actually like them both, but they're far from classy. Seriously class is the worst description of them both.
 

chaminda_00

Hall of Fame Member
You've really gotta start naming names, because over the last 10 posts you've spoted general stuff without ONE name, other than your barometers of Barry "I couldn't kick a goal in the 2006 GF from 10m in front"Hall and Michael "I'm so skilled but I couldn't kick straight in the last quarter of the 2005 Grand Final" O'Loughlin.

Note: I actually like them both, but they're far from classy. Seriously class is the worst description of them both.
A 5-10 years back I probably name quite a few names, as I followed the game closely. But since the game started to loss some of its skill value I haven't followed it as closely, apart from Swans matches. Even though I watched most Saturday arvo matches (as there no other sport on TV apart from club rugby). I wouldn't know many names apart from big name players from other sides I wouldn't know many of names. And tbh most of the other players aren't really that good to want to remember their name, just another no frills AFL player.

You could always argue that not knowing players names means you don't watch the game enough to judge the sport. But you don't need to follow it regioulously to know what the sports about and where it is good and bad.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Okay well, with all due respect Chaminda, end of discussion here. Can't have a proper debate really.
 

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Isn't "9s" the shortened league format of choice?

Actually, 7s in union is made for league players. When the technical aspects of union are minimalised the league boys generally take union players apart. Wigan won the Middlesex 7s a few years back with a team made of players who'd never played union, ever.
:laugh:

My old high school won the state schoolboys rugby union one year (at least I think they won, they made the final) with a team made up of players from league who'd never played union before.
 

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
And the pure athletes don't last, but the players that have both aspects (your Judd, your Goodes, your Ablett) succeed.

Richmond picked up a guy named Jarrod Oakley Nicholls with their highest pick in the 2006 draft, purely because of his athletic ability.

He's an absolute dud and couldn't last because of his lack of skill.
His work with the pointy stick, hurdling, and landing on the small beach though were second to none.
 

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Union's slower than league. Even if technically there aren't as many stoppages. By the time you get it back in play from kicks out or extract it from the bottom of a pile of 8 bodies there's a lot of time spent hanging around.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Union's slower than league. Even if technically there aren't as many stoppages. By the time you get it back in play from kicks out or extract it from the bottom of a pile of 8 bodies there's a lot of time spent hanging around.
Yeah that's sort of true. Nevertheless at least it's "live ball" time, which is something I find sorely lacking in all American sports, and Rugby League also. AFL, like soccer, is constantly active.
 

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yeah that's sort of true. Nevertheless at least it's "live ball" time, which is something I find sorely lacking in all American sports, and Rugby League also. AFL, like soccer, is constantly active.
Yeah it is, that's the technicality. I read a snippet in a sports mag where they timed how long the ball was actually in play in a selected union game(taking out time spent sitting at the bottom of a ruck and organising line outs etc) and it was 30 minutes out of the full 80 the game was played over. Obviously it varies for each game though. League would obviously lose a lot of time to tackles etc too.
 

Craig

World Traveller
I have watched many a rugby league game both on TV and at the ground and I have looked at the clock and the time has just flown by, yet I haven't quite got that out of both the AFL games I have been too and watched on TV.
 

Mister Wright

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I have watched many a rugby league game both on TV and at the ground and I have looked at the clock and the time has just flown by, yet I haven't quite got that out of both the AFL games I have been too and watched on TV.
Yeah agree, that's my main issue with AFL, even though it's the same length as a RL game, the quarters just seem to drag on in AFL.
 

Top