Union is only competitive because it has 30 players on the pitch, as opposed to 26. There simply is not the room to do anything, whether you have best backs or not. That is the exactly reason it is crap to watch. It is ok having a competitive game, but if it is boring as hell, which it is, then what is the point?

Not sure I agree with that - agree its boring to watch - the problem with union is the focus is on territory so the first option is always to kick deep and gain position that way - it would be like RL kicking over the dead ball line all the time. There seems little incentive for the backs to run the ball - bizarre game. The differential for a try isn't big enough - Farrell kicked 8 penalties and the Welsh guy 9 in one game - only 2 trys!!

Agree.
Despite there being more players on the pitch there is often a lot more space. It's the nature of the game and the different ways of competing that make it more even.
And as you say the points for penalties are too high. It's boring but I don't blame teams at all for taking penalties. I've often wondered why teams even bother going for tries. I'd just recruit a top drop goal specialist and every time we're within 30-40m of the posts I'd go for a drop goal. And obviously take every penalty available.

Interesting piece on the England-Wales game from former England coach Brian Ashton. Lessons for those involved in RL coaching on the need to coach players to be able to adapt to changing game situations and respond accordingly. www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugb ... 72726.html

Interesting piece on the England-Wales game from former England coach Brian Ashton. Lessons for those involved in RL coaching on the need to coach players to be able to adapt to changing game situations and respond accordingly. www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugb ... 72726.html

The England v Wales game was just a game of penalty lottery.

Should anyone applaud a team for beating another by being able to win more penalties than thier opponents. Which more often than not is at the whim of the referee.

England lost (as I expected) because they were forced to infringe at the breakdown to be competitive with Wales. Non of the English back row have any pace or skill at the tackle. England also, as they have done consistently under this coaching team, stopped playing anything resembling positive rugby after 60 minutes.

And yet, as Ashton's piece points out, they had managed to control the breakdown well enough for the first 60 minutes to be ahead of the game.

Once Wales went up a gear towards the end though, the one-dimensional nature of Wood, Robshaw and Haskell was exposed and they were left having to infringe because they couldn't think on their feet quickly enough to control the game. Had England, rather than kicking ball away in that final quarter, had the confidence to keep it, go through the phases and run some time off the clock they may well have still been able to grind out the win.

Still, that's what happens when you cut your nose off to spite your face and don't pick your best back row player because of where he plays his club rugby.

The coaching decisions made in the last 25 minutes were awful. Bringing on Ford smacked of weakness in
the coach. There was no need to take Burgess off, he was actually solid the whole game.
England make too many changes and appear to be poorly prepared when they happen. Clive Woodward wrote about the team England finished with being totally inappropriate for the critical last 20 minutes of the match.
It's happened time and time again and the only people to blame are the coaches.

I have played both codes and to my mind, they each have merit as a player. As a spectator it is no contest. I watched England throw the game against Wales away and was gobsmacked to realise that they are simply incapable of putting a few passes together.

Lancaster went for brawn and not pace and picking Farrell, Barrett and Burgess was a grave mistake. Any two of them, but not all three.
I think that fact that Burgess was a (great) RL prop less than twelve months ago and is now a RU centre, says a lot about the creativity and pace of RU. If the Twickers mob had any sense they would have plundered Watkins. Thankfully, they don't seem to have this commodity in abundance.

England didn't throw it away, Wales finished stronger and fitter and took it away from them

Let's hope that Sam Burgess scratches that itch and we bid for him as a marquee player and give him whatever he wants. He's a special, once a generation player and I can't believe they can't utilise him in kick and clap.

Has anyone mentioned yet that its England v Uruguay at the Etihad on Grand Final day? Should make for some interesting conversations round Piccadilly Gardens.

Almost like it was intended to crash the RFLs big day.