Super League is more exciting says Buderus

[george hotel1895]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/n...6326579367

[drsrhino]

I have always thought that we have the more entertaining game over here. The reason is that down under they are technically better than us and better coached and therefore games become a war of attrition and whoever cracks first loses. We dont have games of that intensity that often in sl.

[Farmduck]

Same story, different thread

http://www.superleaguefans.com/forum/thread-7437.html

[The Swede]

Super League is more porous. For a fat, thrill-seeking emperor, sat in the corner watching the game, of course he's going to be entertained. But the Aussies don't tour over here with the intention of entertaining; the tour with intention of winning, and kicking the living sh*te out of us lot is a pretty nice bonus.

[Baldboy]

(04-17-2012 08:16 AM)Saint Until I Die Wrote:  Super League is more porous. For a fat, thrill-seeking emperor, sat in the corner watching the game, of course he's going to be entertained. But the Aussies don't tour over here with the intention of entertaining; the tour with intention of winning, and kicking the living sh*te out of us lot is a pretty nice bonus.

Very well summed up Saint.

[5point]

That's the nature of sport. Football of any kind becomes more defensive over time. Italian soccer was a bore until they introduced 3 points for a win, encouraging teams to take calculated risks. The rugby equivalent is bonus points in union, a road I hope league doesn't go down because our open play and scoring system already encourages teams to go for tries even in a defence-defence war of attrition.

Absolutely nothing wrong with a low scoring game, some of them can be cracking confrontations, but if it's really a case of low scoring games season after season (we need more than 2 or 3 seasons to witness a trend and, to be fair, there have been a few real try fests in the NRL this year) because attack is stifled then we need to find ways to encourage defences to breakdown. Interchanges can be reduced for sure (this is the one rule that I think is acceptable to be different at different levels of play - allow different numbers outside NRL, SL, WC, 4N). Other changes need to be carefully thought out.
I'd hate to see the NRL drift slowly away from RL as a whole and become more NFL-like in it's approach to sports entertainment.

[8ULL5HITT4]

Maybe Buderus was just looking for excuses why he grew soft languishing in our game.

[5point]

(04-17-2012 09:25 AM)8ULL5HITT4 Wrote:  Maybe Buderus was just looking for excuses why he grew soft languishing in our game.

There's probably an element of this in his thinking, but he's not the only one who's saying it. With all the stuff being tried in the all star game and the big TV deal, going to 12 players, introducing power plays etc isn't beyond the realms of possibility. Be a real shame if they go down this road.

[camdentiger]

(04-17-2012 08:16 AM)Saint Until I Die Wrote:  Super League is more porous. For a fat, thrill-seeking emperor, sat in the corner watching the game, of course he's going to be entertained. But the Aussies don't tour over here with the intention of entertaining; the tour with intention of winning, and kicking the living sh*te out of us lot is a pretty nice bonus.

Couldn't agree more - we need to take an element of that into our game so we can turn the tables on them! We have proved at club level the English game can beat the Aussies, so now it's time to get that steel in our International team!

[Farmduck]

I just watched the replay of Cas v Fev. There was only one try in the last 50 minutes and only 7 points scored in the second half but it was one of the best English games I've seen this year. All you need for entertainment is two closely-matched teams and a sunny day. 10-8 can be just as exciting as 30-28