giddyupoldfella wrote:The Australia's learnt the game from us and now they do the game much better than us. Maybe it's time for us to learn from them now?
It's not a case of their players are born better, we can produce as good talented players as them yet we haven't beaten them in a rugby war for 52 years.
We have a competition platform to play on with Super league just as they do with their league. So where is it going wrong?
Is it grass roots?
Is it coaching?
Is it standard of refereeing?
Is it money?
Is it leadership?
Is it lack of competativeness in games?
It can't be lack of talented players because you look at recent British players that have gone down there to ply their trade. Sam Burgess and James Graham both big stars down their who became captains of their clubs. Gareth Ellis was his clubs player of the season on more than 1 occasion. John Bateman was awarded their competitions back rower of the season. Josh Hodgson was just a decent hooker in Super League, he went down there and people were putting him on the level of best hooker in their competition alongside the immortal Cameron Smith.
5 years ago we played Australia on their home soil in the World Cup final and lost a very tight game by 6 points. There's no way it should be 52 years since we last beat them in a war.
Sometimes the most obvious answer is the asnwer. They have a better competition and a better pool of players. That's why. Rugby league doesn't lend itself to one-off upsets. You can't park the bus and hit a team on the break.They are just better because they have the best athletes, more of them, playing in a better competition. Of course over that period we've had little periods where we just happened to have a number of top players come through at the same time, and so have come close. But we have so little depth in comparison that one injury or loss of form dramatically weakens us, and there#s nearly always liable to be ''something'' that isn't quite perfect. Walmesley is out for the world cup now, isn't he? There you go.
Learn what from them exactly??
Here's how it probably goes. Whatever infrastructure or 'things' they have implemented, we learn about it and then:
A - ''Ok great, let's start implementing these right away''
B - ''Well it's going to cost xxxx to implement this''
A - ''Damn, we can't afford that, let's just raise more money''
B - ''Well xxxx is given based on how lucrative xxxx is, and rugby league only generates xxxx, so it's not possible''
A - ''Can't we just raise money like Austrailia do?''
B - ''The game isn't popular enough to generate that kind of income''
Or something like that. I don't know the inner workings of these things behind the scenes,hence ''xxxx'', but it's down to money.
