ML or GP

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Also, its great to see that in early march it's already looking like the ML is just going to be a two horse race. Oh the excitement!

To be fair there has been plenty of years where one team as been top of the GP and strolled home only to bottle the playoffs like Gloucster or Sale. IMO the only reason any of the GP matches are more entertaining is because they have more riding on them ie playoffs or relegation.

BTW why are both sides of the debate coming accross as so smug and belittling the other. Both have made valid points but why can't people be civil?

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Who else will make the play-offs then? Atleast that's wide open. It's comical people are using the excuse that because of the international shortages the ML games will be poor considering a there's quite a large number of games played when teams dont have their internationals.

The ML would be just as wide open if there was playoffs.

And the Ml will always be to a lesser standard in international periods because the GP has a lot more foreign players. I guess you could say that makes it better but then again look at the English national team.

Chucky the tree wrote: »

If the play-off system was scraped for this year it would still be wide open though. Last year there was 10 point gap between 1st and 6th. The problem with the ML is there's ony 4 teams who have a chance to win it, and usually one teams will be gone by December. Also, surely the fact the matches are more entertaining says it all? Why would anyone want to watch a Connaught gwent match? There playing for nothing so the chances of it being a great game are alot slimmer.

Ah so you picked the two worst teams in the ML. Well I'd much rather watch a Connacht-Dragons match than watch Bristol or Newcastle play. For the record I don't think the ML is superior but obviously I'm going to prefer it if I support a team in it.

Mont care to eat your words about Newcastle?

That was a cracking, cracking game of rugby...lets hope Wasps/Li builds on it....

Chucky the tree wrote: »

And if the the GP had all the players who play in the super 14 it would be better then the ML. I can throw a millions "if's" at you if you want, it's better to deal in facts though.

We are not discussing which league is better for developing international players so again the point is pretty invalid. But if you like we can talk about who did better in the last WC? Or how England are complete muck lately yet we can only beat them by 1 point at home when we are supposedly playing the best rugby we have in a long long time.



I prefer to watch a match that actually has some importance, not some dead rubber. I am looking at both leagues from a neutral point of view. As a Munster fan I'd watch a ML game that impacts on Munster over any GP match, but as a Munster man I can accept that the GP is more enjoyable spectecle due to the play-off/relegation/foreign imports over AIL players for a 1/3 of the games etc etc.





So because ML has had more winners it's more competitive? If those teams all had it won by December it would be more competitive? How many matches are played when Internations are missing? Atleast a 1/3 isnt it?

Play-offs wont appeal to everyone but you cant deny they are far more exciting then a straight league format, should that not be the main of clubs to provide excitement to the fans?

I agree it's still finding it feet, and until it does imo the GP will is a more attractive league for the a rugby fan due to the layout of the league. Another problem with the ML is no relegation. Sicne teams at the bottom have nothing to pay for it means that teams who are in the hunt to win the league have a big advantage. The great thing about the GP is that with HEC qualification depending on league place there is something to play for right up until the end of the season.

England have been ****e since 2003, they say, it everybody knows it. The WC in 2007 was a mystery to everybody including England themselves, they have be on a downward cycle for years now. 6 nations results and matches against the SH, a mark of consistantly show all.

The layout of their league in the past has been to the detriment of their international team, an irrelevant point but a truthful one.

I pointed out the 5 winners because according to you 'only 4 teams can win it' in an attempt to question its competivness, which is ironic when only 4 teams have won the GP in the same period. I know the playoffs will be more attractive but imo the ML will no longer be a league next year with the playoffs, I hope we don't have a Wasps style situation evolving here.

Relegation won't work in the ML, we don't have the population base for it. The S14 don't have it either. Don't be suprised if the GP drops it as has been mooted before with finances dwindling.

The ML is improving year on year, 2 of the last 3 H cup winners been from the ML.

toomevara wrote: »

Hope all you muddled-up ML lovers are watching Sale V Newcastle...and no,before you get confused, don't worry, it's not a different game...rugby union really is supposed to be played like that...fast, entertaining skillful and creative...great game, and on a different plane from yesterdays ML's sludge fest....

Perhaps the weather had something to do with that?!

Smug much though...?

themont85 wrote: »

Smug much though...?

Lol, so thats what that warm, pleasing sensation in me nethers is....as we'd say up here in the republic of Yorkshire,"jog on, jog on"

Stev_o wrote: »

ML teams yesterday had the luxury of playing on grass not sand and mud like in Edgely Park.

Ye having better facilities must really be a killer for the ML.

Unfortunately the old invariable of our temperate climate isn't so.

themont85 wrote: »

What did I say about Newcastle?

e. Connacht would be the same if the ML had relegation, see how much they up their game for the inter pro games.

Well, now your talking! if the Mogadon, sorry Magners, league had relegation it might get interesting, unlikely though, might frighten folk if it were to get genuinely competitive....

And a point of info, you're a wee bit fluirseach with the facts,the Falcons are mid-table not near the bottom....

Some almighty bickering in here. :P

I don't watch a huge amount of the GP (damn my lack of Sky Sports, damn it to hell) but I'd suggest it's a league first of all, so there's a hell of a lot of different rugby being played.

Both the ML and the GP have some very good and some very bad teams. The real difference though is at the bottom - ENglish clubs can get relegated, so a lot of them play dire close rugby to minimise the defeat, rather than try and win. That can suck majorly.

I'd also hazard a guess and say that a league reflects the national team to a degree - Irish teams have tended to be full of flair in teh backs, and athletic rather than truly combative forwards (your Leinster style team) or the tough passionate type (you guessed it - Ulster! :pac:), Wales has a rake of teams in love with themselves, and a marriage of flair and physicality (the Blues and Spreys above all else) Scotland has teams that are really really bad but you're not quite sure why because on paper they're alright. I know this is getting a bit tenuous, so sorry, but then extend this to England - there has always been a love of powerful forwards in England, with arrogant cocky and fantastic back play at times a feature too (Quins, Lirish currently) but a combination of rain and good forwards has always tended to create a tough and narrow league to a degree.

The recent advent of mass importation of foreigners has probably improved the spectacle, but in some ways diluted the passion, meaning the games a little better, but a little less interesting at the same time. I'd rather watch a shít Irish player who cares than a shít import who doesn't, that's fairly common amongst fans of any sport.

I would also add this - since 2003 England have not been very successful. At times this has been because they were poor, but when you think of last year's 6 Nations, you see how extraordinarily unlucky they were (how did they lose to Wales...? How?). English rugby is lacking confidence in itself at the moment, added to which they're suffering from financial problems.

The way I see it, as England improve (and they will) so will their league. I also see our own league as improving too. With the Unions beginning to realise that this is a solid competition, there's more hope for it becoming more and more important and respected.