Rare insight & understanding from an unexpected source

The one does not necessarily exclude the other.

PeterCS wrote:In fairness, Greenwood is a bright fella, just slightly weird.

Pete, I love it that the northerners are seeing the grand game played as it should be. I love it even more that they seem to be enjoying it.

G.Wood wrote:

Mick Sawyer wrote:

JKLever wrote:Have Aus learnt how to scrum yet?

Did you read the article or are you just tossing off?

It's JKL, surely a redundant question

Confirmed, yep, I did waste 5 seconds of my life.

I think it's partly that if you ask almost any back (or ex-back) worth his salt as a runner and handler, he will tend to see both stonewalling, all sorts of spoiling, negative and cunctatory tactics on the one hand, and gouging, crookedness and "gamesmanship" in the scrum, ruck and maul on the other, as a blight on the game.



For a moment I thought you were praising the honest sportsmanlike folk of the North of England, against the slimy shifty mealy-mouthed southern twerps that are such a blot on our fair country.

Will Greenwood is a Lanky man through and through

Greenwood is forthright in his views, but also entertaining (if bordering on eerie).

This is an example. *EXAMPLE HERE*

It may be "typically English" to be able to send yourself up and do it (or used to be), but his joking has surreal elements to it.

PeterCS wrote:I think it's partly that if you ask almost any back (or ex-back) worth his salt as a runner and handler, he will tend to see both stonewalling, all sorts of spoiling, negative and cunctatory tactics on the one hand, and gouging, crookedness and "gamesmanship" in the scrum, ruck and maul on the other, as a blight on the game.



For a moment I thought you were praising the honest sportsmanlike folk of the North of England, against the slimy shifty mealy-mouthed southern twerps that are such a blot on our fair country.

Will Greenwood is a Lanky man through and through

pete, fwiw I'm a long ago back who loves the set piece, a rolling maul & the like. What I detested was an abominable interpretation of Laws whereby game plans were based on giving the other team the ball via a kick & then waiting for a penalty when the ball carrier was smothered by defenders with no intention of allowing him to play the ball.

PeterCS wrote:Greenwood is also quite entertaining (if bordering on eerie).

This is an example.

It may be "typically English" to send yourself up (or as), but his joking has surreal elements to it.

I'll have a look for more of his stuff.

I chucked in one example above - just I was stupid enough to hit SEND when I first meant to press OKAY (for the link).

Amended it now. (see above)

Mick Sawyer wrote:

PeterCS wrote:I think it's partly that if you ask almost any back (or ex-back) worth his salt as a runner and handler, he will tend to see both stonewalling, all sorts of spoiling, negative and cunctatory tactics on the one hand, and gouging, crookedness and "gamesmanship" in the scrum, ruck and maul on the other, as a blight on the game.



For a moment I thought you were praising the honest sportsmanlike folk of the North of England, against the slimy shifty mealy-mouthed southern twerps that are such a blot on our fair country.

Will Greenwood is a Lanky man through and through

pete, fwiw I'm a long ago back who loves the set piece, a rolling maul & the like. What I detested was an abominable interpretation of Laws whereby game plans were based on giving the other team the ball via a kick & then waiting for a penalty when the ball carrier was smothered by defenders with no intention of allowing him to play the ball.

Yep, i know that is more specific, but part of the same negative/unimaginative/sub-cheating pattern I mentioned.

I don't think backs, however free running or debonair, usually have much problem with set pieces which do what they are supposed to.

Even if they pretend to grumble when, say, the ball stays in a scrum that remorselessly advances 15-20-25 metres.

JGK wrote:To summarise:

Rugby is becoming good because it is moving to be more like rugby league.

That's what it sounded like to me as well. Rugby League slowly but surely evolved to give the team with the ball more certainty of retaining possession upon being tackled. Rugby Union is heading in the same direction.

The tackling team is still allowed to contest for the ball in Rugby. League long ago gave up any pretence of being a contest for the ball.

Hass wrote:

JGK wrote:To summarise:

Rugby is becoming good because it is moving to be more like rugby league.

That's what it sounded like to me as well. Rugby League slowly but surely evolved to give the team with the ball more certainty of retaining possession upon being tackled. Rugby Union is heading in the same direction.

What is it with leeeegies? The Tri Nations are being played in accordance with the intent of the Laws. There is absolutely zero thought of it becoming leeeeg like. All that's happened is a restoration of the planned balance of rights between attacker & defender at the tackle.

Mick Sawyer wrote:
What is it with leeeegies?

It's not their fault. It's just that western suburbs/Ipswich mentality

G.Wood wrote:

Mick Sawyer wrote:
What is it with leeeegies?

It's not their fault. It's just that western suburbs/Ipswich mentality

More like the game and its devotees belong with gen Y twats & Pakistan cricket.

well there's that too