It's not about conditioning, as you well know. It's about match fitness and being ready for the intensity of top-level competition. The only way you can get that is by playing matches, which the Manly team hadn't done. Now, I don't know if you saw your own team in pre-season, but I saw mine and they were all over the place in the first couple of games: dropped passes, poor timing, things not sticking that normally might etc.

Why not? If they place less importance on it and choose not to prepare for it properly then that's their problem. In the same way some clubs choose to prioritise the league over the FA or Challenge Cup. It still doesn't diminish the achievement of the winner. They can prepare better if they wish to. They choose not to.


I know Leeds, Wigan, Saints and Bradford have all been prepared to play it down under if the Aussie side wished to. None of them did.


Again, why? It's not unreasonable, it might not be what they ideally want, but it's not unreasonable to play a couple of warm up games. Again they choose not to. They aren't forced to not prepare, they choose not to.


You mean apart from 2010, 2008 and 2006? In recent years it's been split down the middle. The refs and reffing interpretations are a bone of contention with the RFL and I know of one former GB coachs' disdain for how refs are chosen by the IRLF and for the schedule of games which has appeared to put GB/England at a disadvantage. The number of games, on lower salary capped squads is also an issue.
If you think the Aussies are seriously disadvantaged by the setup of the WCC then you must also acknowledge the disadvantages faced by England/GB in international setup.
If the Aussie clubs simply aren't taking the WCC as seriously as British clubs then that is their choice. They should either shut up whinging about it and admit the British clubs who win it are, by right, the best in the world or take it seriously.

If you say so, sweetheart.

I do, darling.

Hull did that for most of last season. It would have been surprising if they hadnt done it preseason aswell.

They choose not to because it's right in the middle of their preparations for the NRL, which is more important to them.



Fair enough. Probably isn't the interest down there.



It's unreasonable because it would disrupt their pre-season preparations. If they played a couple of warm up games before the WCC, then a couple of pre-season games ahead of the NRL kick off, that's a 4-5 game pre-season. Ridiculous for any club.



Seems like clutching at straws to me. Whether we're here or down under there's no difference to the final outcome. And I really don't think refs or reffing calls have had anything to do with our lack of success for the last umpteen years.



That could have a bearing, granted.



I don't, other than the playing more games issue. We have played them at least as often in this country as we have down under, with a variety of different referees, and with a variety of playing formats/schedules. The outcome is depressingly familiar.



That would all be well and good if it was played at a time that enabled them to take it more seriously without having a profound impact on their preparations for the NRL season.

With a largely new squad and a new coach, one could quite easily expect there to have been a change from last season, but not until that new squad had played a few games together and got up to match fitness/intensity. Even without new players, any team needs some pre-season games before they are up to the rigours of a SL/NRL/WCC game. Make it about my club/your club all you want, but that's not what this is. I have openly stated the respect I have for Leeds and everything they have achieved over the SL era only a few posts back. I can't be any clearer than that.

The Manly coach seemed dispell any idea of Manly not taking this game seriously. Manly on paper had one of the strongest line ups of any Aussie team to play in this game. Leeds played their bollards off and deserved to win.

On a side note it was great to see too young British centres have great games against two of the best centres in the game.

Winners find a way to win. Losers find excuses.

If manly cant prepare for the WCC it is because they arent good enough to win the WCC. If they were good enough, they would have won.

That's just silly. It's not just Manly. British clubs have dominated this competition for long enough. You really don't think that has anything at all to do with the timing/location of the fixture? We can't win an international competition for toffee, but (more or less) all of our SL winners are superior to their NRL counterparts?

Its not silly. Its rugby league, it isnt played on paper, it isnt played in your imagination. It isnt played on ifs buts and maybes, it isnt played with handicaps, it isnt played with advantages. It is played on a patch of grass, with two goals, officials and 34 players and what happens in that 80minutes is all that matters.

Does this way to win include getting the benefit of a very dodgy call on the Webb bomb spill which 99 times out of 100 would be called a knock on and does it also include getting away with forward passes.

If the answer is yes, the "finding a way to win" in your world means the officials having a shocker in your favour and cheating the rules?