View Full Version : Expansion Sydney Swans vs Random NRL Team
I brought this up on another thread but its a interesting topic so it deserves its own thread. I dont think it will happen but its fun to speculate.
They should organise a 2 match series between the Sydney Swans and a NRL team (probably Eels, Roosters or Bulldogs). 1 Rugby League match will be played and 1 Aussie Rules match will be played.
Aussie Rules
1 point = 1 point
Rugby League
1 point = 3.5 points
This is make it fair as Rugby League is a game where scores are lower. It is a simple idea and the end of both matches you add up the points scored in both matches by both teams and whichever has more points wins.
Obviously the Swans would have serious trouble against the NRL team at Rugby League. The Swans wouldnt be too bad when attacking but would have serious defensive problems.
Also the NRL team would also have a large amount of problems playing Aussie Rules. They would tackle well (at the start) but it wouldnt take long for them to be completely out of energy. The NRL team's players (overall) wouldnt have the foot skills required for Aussie Rules and i dont think their forwards would be too good at marking the ball which is obviously a big requirement.
Obviously the NRL team would thrash the Swans at Rugby League and the Swans would smash the NRL team playing Aussie Rules but which team do you think would win when you added up the points from both games?
Black Thunder
2 Jun 2008, 19:04
Obviously the NRL team would thrash the Swans at Rugby League and the Swans would smash the NRL team playing Aussie Rules but which team do you think would win when you added up the points from both games?
then what would be the point??
and it may be fun to speculate, but as a swans fan yourself it wouldn't be so fun to look at the medical table after the rugby league match. the sheer brutal physicallity of the sport is not what any australian rules player would be used to....
alo_saints_fan
2 Jun 2008, 19:08
Sydney would win, purely because any one can run and throw a ball, yet it is very hard to put about 10 different skills together in the space of 30 seconds to score a goal. Sydney would be able to defend in rugby but the NRL team would have no clue when it came to AFL.
I brought this up on another thread but its a interesting topic so it deserves its own thread. I dont think it will happen but its fun to speculate.
They should organise a 2 match series between the Sydney Swans and a NRL team (probably Eels, Roosters or Bulldogs). 1 Rugby League match will be played and 1 Aussie Rules match will be played.
Aussie Rules
1 point = 1 point
Rugby League
1 point = 3.5 points
This is make it fair as Rugby League is a game where scores are lower. It is a simple idea and the end of both matches you add up the points scored in both matches by both teams and whichever has more points wins.
Obviously the Swans would have serious trouble against the NRL team at Rugby League. The Swans would be too bad when attacking but would have serious defensive problems.
Also the NRL team would also have a large amount of problems playing Aussie Rules. They would tackle well (at the start) but it wouldnt take long for them to be completely out of energy. The NRL team's players (overall) wouldnt have the foot skills required for Aussie Rules and i dont think their forwards would be too good at marking the ball which is obviously a big requirement.
Obviously the NRL team would thrash the Swans at Rugby League and the Swans would smash the NRL team playing Aussie Rules but which team do you think would win when you added up the points from both games?
Do you really think the coaches would be in favour of this?
We are talking about professional athletes you realise - they get paid to play their sport - not some other sport that has great potential for injury.
Think soft tissue injuries for the rugby league boys and perhaps a few broken bones for the Aussie Rules fellas.
Do you really think the coaches would be in favour of this?
We are talking about professional athletes you realise - they get paid to play their sport - not some other sport that has great potential for injury.
Think soft tissue injuries for the rugby league boys and perhaps a few broken bones for the Aussie Rules fellas.
You dont have to take it that seriously. Lets just say they have this 2 match competition in October after both competitions finals so broken bones and soft tissue injuries are not really a problem.
ashley12
2 Jun 2008, 19:17
This is possibly the worst idea ever...
And thats a big call...
funkyfetlock
2 Jun 2008, 19:40
Lol yeah it is a terrible idea that would never happen but it is fun to speculate about.
The Swans are one of the toughest and hardest tackling team in the AFL but we just wouldn't have the big strong forward power needed to defend against the rugby league gorillas. If we could get Hall back, maybe he could take a few of the gorillas out with a few well-placed uppercuts before being sent off.
Kirky would almost hold his own I think with many of the rugby league players in terms of hardness and toughness in defense but he just wouldn't be big enough to hold out against the constant barrage.
In short I think the Swans would flog the thugby gorillas by a lot more in Aussie Rules than they would get beaten by in RL.
Father Jack
2 Jun 2008, 19:50
This is the sort of thing they used to all the time back in the early days. If nothing else, the swans could get Gary Jack as a specialist coach.
Black Thunder
2 Jun 2008, 19:59
Sydney would be able to defend in rugby but the NRL team would have no clue when it came to AFL.
are you serious??
i'm a far bigger AFL fan than NRL fan but one thing that annoys me about aussie rules supporters is the way they ignore how hard the tackling is in League.
It is one of the toughest sports on the planet. And it's not just the quantity of tackles, its the fericousness of just about every one.
When a forward gets the ball, he is charging from about 5 to 10 metres back to get momentum, then goes on another 5 to 10 metres to just about full speed and crashed into two or three fellas to try and get every last centre metre that he can....
Unlike Union where a players hits a tackle with the intention of going to ground and facing back towards his teammates. Union players go into a tackle with no where near the momentum behind them that a League player does.
I don't think there's too many players in the swans line up (or any AFL line up) who'd be too keen on getting in the way of Sonny Bill Williams, Mark O'Meley or Willie Mason at top pelt.
Sebastian Balboa
2 Jun 2008, 20:31
One word that's rarely used when people are discussing rugby league: skill or skills. There's hardly any of it.
Sebastian Balboa
2 Jun 2008, 20:33
are you serious??
i'm a far bigger AFL fan than NRL fan but one thing that annoys me about aussie rules supporters is the way they ignore how hard the tackling is in League.
It is one of the toughest sports on the planet. And it's not just the quantity of tackles, its the fericousness of just about every one.
When a forward gets the ball, he is charging from about 5 to 10 metres back to get momentum, then goes on another 5 to 10 metres to just about full speed and crashed into two or three fellas to try and get every last centre metre that he can....
Unlike Union where a players hits a tackle with the intention of going to ground and facing back towards his teammates. Union players go into a tackle with no where near the momentum behind them that a League player does.
I don't think there's too many players in the swans line up (or any AFL line up) who'd be too keen on getting in the way of Sonny Bill Williams, Mark O'Meley or Willie Mason at top pelt.
I tell you what's funny, is that blokes in rugby league can rack up huge tackle counts but when you analyse how, the majority come from being the 2nd, 3rd, 4th or even 5th man in: wrap your arms around the others at the end of a tackle, and it's a tackle stat. Laughable really.
Two completely different skill sets.. No off side rule and the Australian rules blokes would simply kick & handball at a rate where the rugby league blokes would not touch it. Off side rule & the in-close tackling of RL would dominate.
Different games. If they were similar in any point of their history, we would probably only have one game in Australia now.
genghiskhan
2 Jun 2008, 21:34
One word that's rarely used when people are discussing rugby league: skill or skills. There's hardly any of it.
In high school, I used to play in a mid-week touch football team. Our team used to play against all these old grand pas that looked like they needed a walk stick, but they would cane us. We were young, fit, fast, agile, but they just knew when to throw throw the ball and when to take a touch. That's the thing about rugby league. You don't need many skills to play it, but your skills need to be really refined, and you need to have a feel for the way the game is being played.
The only way that I could see the AFL team winning would be to change the way the game is being played. At the moment, rugby league is played like the trench warfare of world war 1. It is a simply hit up against a defence, much like trench warfare was a charge with the odd tank thrown in. After four years of the same thing happening, trench warfare was eventually broken using blitzkrieg strategy (developed by a Melbourne man.) Tanks, aircraft were integrated so that attacks could be instigated from behind the lines, and then the soldiers simply provided support.
It would be interesting to see if the AFL could do the same thing to rugby league. When in possession, the seven backs run forward to take a mark from a kick, or get into position to take a hand pass/pass from a marker. Although an NRL team could defuse a bomb put in a corner, no NRL player could outmark an AFL player one on one. Furthermore, spoiling the AFL marker would usually propel the ball forward and would be a penalty in the AFL team's favour. On the other hand, even if the AFL player dropped it, most of the time they would propel it backwards and it would be play on.
The rugby league defence would have no idea what to do. The players have been brought up to defend a line, but against a team with vastly superior power in the air, that defensive line would be useless.
In high school, I used to play in a mid-week touch football team. Our team used to play against all these old grand pas that looked like they needed a walk stick, but they would cane us. We were young, fit, fast, agile, but they just knew when to throw throw the ball and when to take a touch. That's the thing about rugby league. You don't need many skills to play it, but your skills need to be really refined, and you need to have a feel for the way the game is being played.
The only way that I could see the AFL team winning would be to change the way the game is being played. At the moment, rugby league is played like the trench warfare of world war 1. It is a simply hit up against a defence, much like trench warfare was a charge with the odd tank thrown in. After four years of the same thing happening, trench warfare was eventually broken using blitzkrieg strategy (developed by a Melbourne man.) Tanks, aircraft were integrated so that attacks could be instigated from behind the lines, and then the soldiers simply provided support.
It would be interesting to see if the AFL could do the same thing to rugby league. When in possession, the seven backs run forward to take a mark from a kick, or get into position to take a hand pass/pass from a marker. Although an NRL team could defuse a bomb put in a corner, no NRL player could outmark an AFL player one on one. Furthermore, spoiling the AFL marker would usually propel the ball forward and would be a penalty in the AFL team's favour. On the other hand, even if the AFL player dropped it, most of the time they would propel it backwards and it would be play on.
The rugby league defence would have no idea what to do. The players have been brought up to defend a line, but against a team with vastly superior power in the air, that defensive line would be useless.
Great analogy. The war is often won from the air.
In high school, I used to play in a mid-week touch football team. Our team used to play against all these old grand pas that looked like they needed a walk stick, but they would cane us. We were young, fit, fast, agile, but they just knew when to throw throw the ball and when to take a touch. That's the thing about rugby league. You don't need many skills to play it, but your skills need to be really refined, and you need to have a feel for the way the game is being played.
The only way that I could see the AFL team winning would be to change the way the game is being played. At the moment, rugby league is played like the trench warfare of world war 1. It is a simply hit up against a defence, much like trench warfare was a charge with the odd tank thrown in. After four years of the same thing happening, trench warfare was eventually broken using blitzkrieg strategy (developed by a Melbourne man.) Tanks, aircraft were integrated so that attacks could be instigated from behind the lines, and then the soldiers simply provided support.
It would be interesting to see if the AFL could do the same thing to rugby league. When in possession, the seven backs run forward to take a mark from a kick, or get into position to take a hand pass/pass from a marker. Although an NRL team could defuse a bomb put in a corner, no NRL player could outmark an AFL player one on one. Furthermore, spoiling the AFL marker would usually propel the ball forward and would be a penalty in the AFL team's favour. On the other hand, even if the AFL player dropped it, most of the time they would propel it backwards and it would be play on.
The rugby league defence would have no idea what to do. The players have been brought up to defend a line, but against a team with vastly superior power in the air, that defensive line would be useless.
Plus trench warfare in WW1 was stupid and pointless. They were at it forever and got vertually nowhere for 98% of that time.
Even I think this is a very silly thread....but what the heck
Barry Hall, Adam Goodes, O'loughlin, Lewis Roberts-Thomson, Keiran Jack just to name a few who would do well playing RL
Everitt and Goodes to take the bombs,,,etc
As I said silly thread. Have to respect the RL players and their game. Can take this opportunity to take the mickey out of them but it aint worth it.
There are other ways...:D
60-80 interchanges through a game should see the league boys last an AR game, plus plenty of time for a rest between add breaks and shots on goal. Their kicking skills would probably be lacking, but most people think I'm an ok kick despite never playing the game.
30-50 tackles would probably see the AR boys wave the white flag in a RL game.
Gman would have done it better.
Not a paid idea, would definently be fun to watch. I reckon Inu would give some of the AFL boys a running in the jumping stakes. See his catches on Friday night? Wow.
What if they played a half of AR, then a half of RL (score x 5).
IF they played AR first, the NRL boys would be totally stuffed with the amount of running. Likewise if played RL first. the AFL player would be battered & bruised beyond what they have ever known.
Having said that, Swans would win.
magpie_man
3 Jun 2008, 01:34
have any of you guys watched state of origin? have you seen how the sides come out and SMASH eachother for the entire game?
i'm telling you now, that will seem like a game of netball compared to what an NRL team would be trying to do to an AFL team if they ever played RL. it would be brutal.
THRILLHO
3 Jun 2008, 11:32
In my opinion, everyone is overstating the importance of tackling and understating the importance of fitness. Put simply, the rugby league forwards would be dead in the water after a half of football. I couldnt imagine Willie Mason being able to cover the distance required.
Having said that, I think there would be a specialised group of players chosen for this kind of game. The Ryan O'Keefe type would adapt quite well to league as compared to a prima donna like Goodes. In regards to the AFL players, you would pick players like Mitchell, Lewis, Hodge, Daniel Harris, Hayes, Ball for their tackling skills and you would expect that their ball-handling skills, while not as high as Judd, Ablett et cetera, would easily account for the comparative skills of their league opponents
Furthermore, I couldnt think of a single league type who could possible go with Richardson, or Pavlich in the AFL version. They would be simply too dominant in the air and far superior atheletically. There is a lot of compliments for Folau's aerial skills, but he would be out of his depth against players like that.
For mine, the tackling is overemphasised, ther's plenty of it in AFL, and while it's not the head-on collision type stuff in NRL, it can still be quite brutal with slings and pinning of the arms etc. Plus, the league type would just be lost with the whole sheparding and hip-and-shoulder element. Their peripheral vision and awareness wouldnt be at the same level.
AFL players just have more strings to their bow. It's as simple as that. In league every role is specialised, and there's never more than three kickers in a team. So while the big forwards may have strength, they wouldnt have the skill to put the ball on the foot.
ParraEelsNRL
3 Jun 2008, 11:43
My god, all we need is cuz, Dr Wally, finders, hoops and Professor knownothing to post and this thread is complete. :eek:
Ok guys, send in a request to the AFL footy show, actually, bombard them with this idea, tell them how much fitter, stronger, talented, skillful, brave and heroic the AFL boys are compared to the nuffies in the NRL, keep it up for months if you have too as I, like so many others would love, and I mean absolutely love to see this type of game.
To make it fair, if you can get this game going, make them play the AFL game first.
:rolleyes:
:D
alo_saints_fan
3 Jun 2008, 12:16
are you serious??
i'm a far bigger AFL fan than NRL fan but one thing that annoys me about aussie rules supporters is the way they ignore how hard the tackling is in League.
It is one of the toughest sports on the planet. And it's not just the quantity of tackles, its the fericousness of just about every one.
When a forward gets the ball, he is charging from about 5 to 10 metres back to get momentum, then goes on another 5 to 10 metres to just about full speed and crashed into two or three fellas to try and get every last centre metre that he can....
Unlike Union where a players hits a tackle with the intention of going to ground and facing back towards his teammates. Union players go into a tackle with no where near the momentum behind them that a League player does.
I don't think there's too many players in the swans line up (or any AFL line up) who'd be too keen on getting in the way of Sonny Bill Williams, Mark O'Meley or Willie Mason at top pelt.
My point way that the AFL player could (as long as they didnt sh1t themselves) tackle the NRL players, but i would find it hard to see the NRL players being able to move the ball swiftly on and AFL ground.
THRILLHO
3 Jun 2008, 12:27
I love how everyone is talking as though the NRL players would be matching up against an U/12's team. :rolleyes:
To make it fair, if you can get this game going, make them play the AFL game first.
Im not sure how you came to the conclusion that the NRL players will have such a dominance that the AFL game needs to be played first to give the game an element of 'fairness', seeing as though in regards to ball handling, kicking, marking and general fitness, AFL players are undeniably superior. Wouldnt mind seeing some qualification for your remarks, that is, if you actually believe it to be true, or you are simply saying as much, so as to keep up your anti-AFL charade on an AFL forum.
A Living God
3 Jun 2008, 12:52
I would say the AFL side would win simply because of the numbers. There is a far greater chance that from an AFL club’s 46 player list that will find 13 half decent RL players than for an NRL club finding 18 half decent Aussie Rules players from their list of 30.
littleduck
3 Jun 2008, 13:24
Plus, the league type would just be lost with the whole sheparding and hip-and-shoulder element. I agree, patience would run out quickly and the biff would be on.
Their peripheral vision and awareness wouldnt be at the same level.
I believe this is a major reason why young kids in NSW and QLD have traditionally stayed away from Aussie Rules or at least tried it and gone back to RL footy. The peripheral vision and awareness you talk about as a great skill for the game, the kids of NSW and QLD regard as "trying to avoid legalised cheap shots".
Well LD, we move on from chucky, kiss chase and British Bulldogs in primary school
This "trying to avoid legalised cheap shots" you talk about proves that you guys are dumbfounded and get lost if your brain/body has to try becoming aware by your surroundings. You see it happens in soccer, you have to be aware of players coming in from any angle...
In RL its like Billy said..." Line up a bunch of Gorillas on one end, line up a bunch of Gorillas on the other end, put a banana in the middle and let them go for it..." ;)
Dumbest most unskillful game out
littleduck
3 Jun 2008, 14:05
This "trying to avoid legalised cheap shots" you talk about proves that you guys are dumbfounded and get lost if your brain/body has to try becoming aware by your surroundings. I'm glad you see my point. You're exactly right.
You see it happens in soccer, you have to be aware of players coming in from any angle... Yeah, but soccer is not a collision sport so you do not have to constantly be aware of your surroundings to avoid the legalised cheap shots the contest for the ball in AFL is successfully built around. In RL its the 'ol maori sidestep more often than not.
In RL its like Billy said..." Line up a bunch of Gorillas on one end, line up a bunch of Gorillas on the other end, put a banana in the middle and let them go for it..." ;)
Yeah, footballers going head to head and not going at each other from any 'ol angle.
THRILLHO
3 Jun 2008, 14:09
How is it a 'legalised cheap shot'? It's making space for the ball-carrier / keeping the ball carrier safe. A perfectly executed shepherd is one of the finer arts of the game and highly invaluable for the team. You think Dale Thomas could have kicked a running, four bounce goal if his team-mates didnt work off the ball to help clear / protct space for him?
littleduck
3 Jun 2008, 15:06
How is it a 'legalised cheap shot'? Its the possibility of being hit from any angle, including from behind and to the side (ie, where you cant see), that gives rise to the cheap shot. The reason it takes courage to put your head over the ball in a contest for possesson is due to the possibility of being legally hit from the side and/or the back.
RL is an eyeball to eyeball collision sport. None of the coming in from the back or the side type collisions. They are regarded as cheap shots.
Its the possibility of being hit from any angle, including from behind and to the side (ie, where you cant see), that gives rise to the cheap shot. The reason it takes courage to put your head over the ball in a contest for possesson is due to the possibility of being legally hit from the side and/or the back.
RL is an eyeball to eyeball collision sport. None of the coming in from the back or the side type collisions. They are regarded as cheap shots.
c'mon, RL players are supposed to be men playing a supposed tough sport...
cheap shots don't happen as often as you wish...as often as a RL player picking up another player (with the helpp of 3 others) and throwing him on his head.
littleduck
3 Jun 2008, 15:28
c'mon, RL players are supposed to be men playing a supposed tough sport...
cheap shots don't happen as often as you wish...as often as a RL player picking up another player (with the helpp of 3 others) and throwing him on his head.
I hear what you are saying, but I stand by my argument to a certain degree. Its also based on personal experience. My first few games of Aussie Rules were a real wake up call in terms of getting accustomed to the obligatory push in the back and bumps and niggles from all angles that you cant see coming so you cant brace yourself. RL on the other hand is essentially front-on and you can see the big hits coming so you can brace yourself, or at the very least you know what angle they will be coming from. I accept this is a weak argument, but I believe there is something in it.
Hodgepodge
3 Jun 2008, 15:46
Sydney would win by a mile, there are skills in the AussieRules game, not much to speak of in rugby . . just get the ball and run.
Holding The Ball
3 Jun 2008, 16:22
The RL team would dominate both games pretty easily.
RL players are bigger, stronger and have more stamina than AFL players.
philhawk
3 Jun 2008, 16:30
Furthermore, I couldnt think of a single league type who could possible go with Richardson, or Pavlich in the AFL version. They would be simply too dominant in the air and far superior atheletically. There is a lot of compliments for Folau's aerial skills, but he would be out of his depth against players like that.
Inglis could do it easily.
The RL team would dominate both games pretty easily.
RL players are bigger, stronger and have more stamina than AFL players.
I presume your kidding as no one could honestly believe that a NRL team could beat a AFL team in a Aussie Rules match. After 20 minutes the NRL players wouldnt have any energy left as the AFL players would have run them into the ground.
THRILLHO
3 Jun 2008, 16:56
Inglis could do it easily.
I'm happy to be disproven, but in my limited experience of NRL I have never seen him mark over his head. I'm also aware that the dynamics of the game dictate that players should mark on their chest so as not to leave their ribs open to hits, but until we see players like Inglis regularly mark it in the dukes, it seems a bit presumptuous to say 'Inglis could do it easily'.
Somebody earlier said that people were taking tackling into account more than it should of, and not taking fitness in enough. I disagree. NRL players are very fit. To make the takles, the runs and the physical collisions takes a lot of your body. You have to be very fit to last 40 minutes of RL. While a player of the same fitness probally wouldn't be able to last 40 minutes playing AFL, these are professionals athletes. Anyway I couldn't imagine the team the NRL side put out for an AFL match being to much of a forward based team anyway. Probally fast, agile, fit, athletic backs that could probally hold thier own to a certain extent. I mean Inu, Falou, Inglis, Hodgesin particular would be 4 guys that would be able to jump and take some great balls.
The unlimited interchange rule will be of great value to the league boys, just like it is to the rules boys.
Holding The Ball
3 Jun 2008, 19:53
I presume your kidding as no one could honestly believe that a NRL team could beat a AFL team in a Aussie Rules match. After 20 minutes the NRL players wouldnt have any energy left as the AFL players would have run them into the ground.
RL is tougher for athletes than AFL, that's why I reckon that RL would win.