Israel Folau - Why did he fail?

[Markfs]

Spill the mark, and a knock-on is Australian Rules is play on.

Spill the mark in union or league and it goes forward, then at best you've given away possession.

yes I suppose I forgot that ruggers is an english game, isnt it... punish risk taking and prop up the defence. It's the same story in soccer. Offside, knock-on, penalties for this and that, which all end up as points if the kicker can kick. Referees determining outcomes....I tell people if they think AFL umpires determine outcomes, have a look at an english game. So we end up with a two teams of big strong men who are too gutless to go for a speccie because they might make a mistake. Personally, I like the Australian game. It better reflects the Aussie way of life.

Lets leave it there. I'm not that desperate to convince rugger fans of the merits of afl.

 

[RIOLIUSTAR]

He played Rugby growing up...

completely different game, though he would've been a star if he had been brought up in AFL circles

 

[IanW]

yes I suppose I forgot that ruggers is an english game, isnt it... punish risk taking and prop up the defence. It's the same story in soccer. Offside, knock-on, penalties for this and that, which all end up as points if the kicker can kick. Referees determining outcomes....I tell people if they think AFL umpires determine outcomes, have a look at an english game. So we end up with a two teams of big strong men who are too gutless to go for a speccie because they might make a mistake. Personally, I like the Australian game. It better reflects the Aussie way of life.

Lets leave it there. I'm not that desperate to convince rugger fans of the merits of afl.

By the way, your comments are scarily close to the code-warrior stuff in the 1907 edition of the Australian Footballer.

That was the year Australian Rules lost in New South Wales, in my opinion - if Dally M had have gone the other way, it would have been different, but he declined to jump codes.

Go here, click the 14 June edition

http://nswfootballhistory.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Index-to-the-Australian-Footballer.pdf

 

[Engimal]

If Ablett went to rugby he'd be nothing special. I'm doubtful of whether he'd even make a team. Just because guys like Hunt and Falau couldn't make it in our game doesn't mean our players would straight up dominate rugby.

 

[RIOLIUSTAR]

If Ablett went to rugby he'd be nothing special. I'm doubtful of whether he'd even make a team. Just because guys like Hunt and Falau couldn't make it in our game doesn't mean our players would straight up dominate rugby.

Sure but it would be an easier transition I would have thought

 

[Markfs]

If Ablett went to rugby he'd be nothing special. I'm doubtful of whether he'd even make a team. Just because guys like Hunt and Falau couldn't make it in our game doesn't mean our players would straight up dominate rugby.

I suppose we will never know.....but we do know that Folau is categorically, demonstratively, comprehensively crap at aussie rules.

 

[Markfs]

By the way, your comments are scarily close to the code-warrior stuff in the 1907 edition of the Australian Footballer.

That was the year Australian Rules lost in New South Wales, in my opinion - if Dally M had have gone the other way, it would have been different, but he declined to jump codes.

Go here, click the 14 June edition

http://nswfootballhistory.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Index-to-the-Australian-Footballer.pdf

thank you for link

 

[IanW]

I suppose we will never know.....but we do know that Folau is categorically, demonstratively, comprehensively crap at aussie rules.

You never saw him stream forward against Adelaide and take a big mark with his hands in front of his chest, againat a defender who knew what he had to do to stop him but couldnt.

Coulda, shoulda woulda.

Yeah, he wasnt great in space, and he never really was able to climb into the sky ... but when we talk about failed key forward prospects, I'll keep saying that when he was on our list, Izzy did what he could - he might have got confused, and he mightnt have had the tank he needed, but he never ever ever dogged it, and when the ball was in front of him, then he put his body on the line and he tried to grab it.

 

[Markfs]

You never saw him stream forward against Adelaide and take a big mark with his hands in front of his chest, againat a defender who knew what he had to do to stop him but couldnt.

Coulda, shoulda woulda.

Yeah, he wasnt great in space, and he never really was able to climb into the sky ... but when we talk about failed key forward prospects, I'll keep saying that when he was on our list, Izzy did what he could - he might have got confused, and he mightnt have had the tank he needed, but he never ever ever dogged it, and when the ball was in front of him, then he put his body on the line and he tried to grab it.

that reminds me of jason cloke.... but he couldnt run, mark or kick but he played about 80 games..

 

[Seedsfan]

League is far more physical the union. Not even in the same stratosphere.

Many many more tackles per game. In a league tackle the ball carrier will hit the line at full pace cause he is trying to get every metre. in union they'll hit the line slightly slower as they'll be looking to position the ball to advantage in the ruck.

Tackling is what takes it out of someone more than anything on the rugby fields.

The blokes are a lot bigger in union yes when the forwards are split in to two pods drawing out phase after phase to try and draw a penalty they don't go in a full speed but when the backs are trying to break the line they give it everything they have got and the backs are a lot bigger than the backs in league

 

[Rob]

Spill the mark, and a knock-on is Australian Rules is play on.

Spill the mark in union or league and it goes forward, then at best you've given away possession.

In a paradoxical way, that's exactly why they can't catch the bloody thing in their hands. They don't even bother trying because the risk is too great, so they don't even practice it. Nor do they practice actually defending a 'marking' contest (not sure what they call it).

I remember in the NRL grand final someone bombed the ball to a contest, one of them went up and took it on his chest because the defender had absolutely no idea how to kill it. To quote a line from dodgeball, he looked like a * trying to hump a doorknob.

There's things all games can learn from other codes.

 

[The Passenger]

The blokes are a lot bigger in union yes when the forwards are split in to two pods drawing out phase after phase to try and draw a penalty they don't go in a full speed but when the backs are trying to break the line they give it everything they have got and the backs are a lot bigger than the backs in league

yeah on average union backs would be bigger but you still get some big units in the league. but the sheer amount of tackling you make in league is what sets it apart. I played union all through high school and got called in to play a couple of under 21's club games when i was in year 12. Was good fun but preferred Aussie Rules. Played about half a dozen games of league in the under 16's at five eight and that was enough for me.

Union is a much much much more complex game than league. That doesn't necessarily equate to being more skillful. More skills required in the forward pack of union then league but out in the backs some of the things the league guys can do are insane. I'm sure a lot of the Union boys could do it too but the nature of the way Union is being played now is the backs don't always get the chance to show off what they can do, which is disappointing.

I wish union was like it was 10 years ago. The players are too fit now and the defences too hard to break down. IMO they need to widen the field about 15 metres to stretch the defence but that is not really feasible with big stands in the way. Watching the All Blacks and NZ inter-provincial rugby is about the only thing that gives me the running rugby spine chills of years gone by. Watched a handful of games in Sydney club rugby over the last few years and that is good entertainment and a high standard. The Wallabies aren't as bad as people say - but their weaknesses get exposed when they play so much against The All Blacks or South Africa. But it's been 6 or 7 years since they've been a consistently entertaining team to watch (around about the time Larkham started to decline then retire the attractiveness of the Wallabies play dropped off significantly and has never really come back). It also doesn't help that they are full of tossers.

 

[IanW]

The players are too fit now and the defences too hard to break down.

That aint just the story in Union.

I'd argue Roos/Lyon footy and Wokball have the same roots.

 

[Present Not Past]

Did he fail though? I don't think he was employed to play Aussie Rules. I think he was poached to create a headline. And in that I think he was a success.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I reckon Izzy not only would have made it, but been a great player, with at least five or six years in the system. Once he got his skills and the feel of the game up to scratch, which would take that long, there was no stopping his athletic capabilities.

 

[Seedsfan]

yeah on average union backs would be bigger but you still get some big units in the league. but the sheer amount of tackling you make in league is what sets it apart. I played union all through high school and got called in to play a couple of under 21's club games when i was in year 12. Was good fun but preferred Aussie Rules. Played about half a dozen games of league in the under 16's at five eight and that was enough for me.

Union is a much much much more complex game than league. That doesn't necessarily equate to being more skillful. More skills required in the forward pack of union then league but out in the backs some of the things the league guys can do are insane. I'm sure a lot of the Union boys could do it too but the nature of the way Union is being played now is the backs don't always get the chance to show off what they can do, which is disappointing.

I wish union was like it was 10 years ago. The players are too fit now and the defences too hard to break down. IMO they need to widen the field about 15 metres to stretch the defence but that is not really feasible with big stands in the way. Watching the All Blacks and NZ inter-provincial rugby is about the only thing that gives me the running rugby spine chills of years gone by. Watched a handful of games in Sydney club rugby over the last few years and that is good entertainment and a high standard. The Wallabies aren't as bad as people say - but their weaknesses get exposed when they play so much against The All Blacks or South Africa. But it's been 6 or 7 years since they've been a consistently entertaining team to watch (around about the time Larkham started to decline then retire the attractiveness of the Wallabies play dropped off significantly and has never really come back). It also doesn't help that they are full of tossers.

When I played Union we would bag people who played league saying it is a simple mans game, union is very defensive now and that has always been more so in the northern hemisphere the bonus point system has helped a bit.
The Wallabies have to many young players with the world at their feet they need some more experienced heads because if you can get JOC, Beale, Izzy, Quade Copper and Ione all in a backline together that would be good to watch. Apart from the fact the backline would lack a bit of size. Michael Cheika says he wants to bring the running game back so lets hope he can do it with the wallabies leading in to the world cup it can get a bit dual when they are just trying to suck the team in to giving away a penalty

 

[Markfs]

I reckon Izzy not only would have made it, but been a great player, with at least five or six years in the system. Once he got his skills and the feel of the game up to scratch, which would take that long, there was no stopping his athletic capabilities.

Yes definitely. And if you put him in a laboratory for 5 or 6 years, I'm sure he'll develop a cure for cancer.

 

[nineteen eighty]

i dont hate rugby, whatever it's shape or form. I dont mind the state of origin. You seem to think that it's skillful to face life in a wheelchair. I'm perplexed. I honestly cant understand why rugby players are so hesitant when the ball goes up in the air. I wish someone would answer that one for me. Israel looks ok and Billy Slater seems to have good ball awareness and there are probably a few others but the average meathead front rower looks like he is being asked to have sex with his sister when he is looking at a ball which has gone up in the air...

sorry...bad analogy...they are a lot less interested in the ball

You sure do say some stupid things. Are you really that stupid or does your hate blind you? I can name a dozen ruckmen that fit your description without blinking.

 

[IanW]

You sure do say some stupid things. Are you really that stupid or does your hate blind you? I can name a dozen ruckmen that fit your description without blinking.

As a side point, and speaking of cross-coders, Eric Wallace is the future of the tap ruckman.

Remember, Mumford is at the Giants because Mike Pyke legitimately beat him out of his spot.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

I reckon Izzy not only would have made it, but been a great player, with at least five or six years in the system.

Who's got 5 or 6 years to invest in a player? The days of the project player are dead and buried, it's now put up or shut up, and rightly so. With the amount of coin these guys get paid, it isn't unrealistic to expect them to perform.

 

[IanW]

Who's got 5 or 6 years to invest in a player? The days of the project player are dead and buried, it's now put up or shut up, and rightly so. With the amount of coin these guys get paid, it isn't unrealistic to expect them to perform.

Biology says hi, and notes that young men dont stop filling out till they are 22 or 23.

This means all drafted "talls" are taken as project players that will take 5 or 6 years to come good.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

You seem to be arguing from a position of ignorance. You made a list of hockey nations in an earlier post and left off the Dutch, which is like listing rugby playing nations and not knowing about New Zealand.

Did I? I don't suppose you could find that list and quote it, could you?

Also, have a look at this, you may be surprised...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_sport

Ah, yes...Wikipedia. Guess you didn't bother to actually follow the reference links.

Let's look at Pakistan first. I've summarised from the two paragraphs written in the Top End Sports article about cricket 'Sport in Pakistan', while including every mention of hockey (not too difficult, since it's essentially half a sentence).

http://www.topendsports.com/world/countries/pakistan.htm

Pakistan has a great range of sports but cricket seems to be the most popular followed by hockey and squash. Cricket is played in most districts of Pakistan and a conventional Pakistani has more likely have played it in one time of their life.

Cricket is so popular that Pakistan has become internationally competitive taking home various honors like wining the Cricket World Cup (1992) and the ICC World Twenty20 (2009)

All in all, they have taken home 10 Olympic medals, 8 of which are from field hockey (3 gold, 3 silver and 2 bronze).

And then the BBC article. This pretty much sums it up for me:

For both India and Pakistan hockey is the national game.

In Pakistan, the younger generation does not even realise it is their national game, and nobody has bothered to remind them.

Now, as far as I'm concerned, if you have to be told that a sport is the 'national game', then it's debatable that it actually is. A national game is pretty self-evident, in my opinion, even for people that don't care about sport.

In fact, in this article in The Huffington Post by Saad Khan suggests that cricket is actually the 'de facto national sport'.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/saad-khan/the-death-of-sports-in-pa_b_498758.html

Pakistanis are mad about cricket and it is the de facto national sport of Pakistan.

All that suggests to me is that this whole 'national sport/game' concept is usually made up and on the rare occasions that it isn't, it's completely meaningless.

And, as for India, well the first reference link just says that: a) there is nothing official that says hockey in the national sport of India; and b) cricket has been the most popular sport in India by far for a long time.

The status of hockey as the national sport is not enshrined in any official proclamation by the Government of India.

Die-hard traditionalists and loyalists to the game will decry any notion of even considering cricket as a replacement but given public passion which has for long been swayed more by cricket than anything else, hockey will have to do something more credible than hanging on to glory of the years gone by to retain its positioning as the heartbeat of the nation.

The second link is broken. And the third link doesn't seem to work either.

Cricket has only really gained the upper hand in India/Pakistan in the last few decades since hockey moved from grass to artificial turf, which made the infrastructure for the sport too expensive in those countries.

I'm not sure why that's relevant.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Biology says hi, and notes that young men dont stop filling out till they are 22 or 23.

This means all drafted "talls" are taken as project players that will take 5 or 6 years to come good.

But they're not kept on the list for 6 years. If they haven't shown enough by 3, they're gone.

 

[CyrilDaSquirrel]

Did I? I don't suppose you could find that list and quote it, could you?

Sure, here it is:

Who are the good hockey teams in the world, besides Australia...Pakistan and India?

You outed yourself with that sentence as an idiot who has no idea what you're talking about.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Sure, here it is:

You outed yourself with that sentence as an idiot who has no idea what you're talking about.

That's me listing every nation that's good at hockey is it?

Lol...righto mate.