A crowd of 10,000 says quite to the contrary.

Would be a good match, Cooper & Genia V Cronk & JT =p~ =p~ =p~ =p~ =p~

Anything between 10,000 and 60,000 people attending the "International Rules" games here in Australia says you're wrong.

No rugby league in my town.

Be more westie.

Edited by eastern glory: 11/12/2013 03:00:26 PM

Would love to see the Kangaroos get a crack at the Wallabies. They would absolutely smash those private school rich boys into the ground.

Just hurry and up sign David Carney so I an bask in your butthurt.


And that's a terrible idea. Union is a pure game, league is a ravaged whore.

If you're referring to the advent of one-day cricket, that was a very different phenomenon. There was no comparative competition. In Rugby there is.

What a moronic comment. If anything it would take off and create a new sport and league with the Murdoch machine jizzing all over itself with the ol prick swallowing all the jizz.

The ARU needs the money. To the purists, they're selling out.

League has no shame, so they don’t care. They just see dollar signs.

England Rahs Rahs don’t need the money, and don’t want a bar of it. There’s no way they’re gonna allow this gimmick on their hallowed turf, much less an army of commoners from England’s northern rust belt to sully the home of rugby.

Zero difference. Gimmick game born of the back and forth banter between the two codes.

About 8,000 seats.

I would go. No doubts about it

Played for CHARITY
Played association football for it's entirety and it only happened because the fucking loudmouths of the VFL gave zero credit to any skill in our code.
Known as "the game that never happened" and for good reason if you follow AFL


Difference much

Isn't it obvious? :lol:

Wow, the Ruggers have really swallowed their pride here. Desperate times indeed.

Yep would easily sellout up here.

Dunno, league and union fans have wondered what a hybrid game would be like for decades.

I think you'd get a decent crowd in October if marketed properly.

Oh, Dockerty Cup. My mistake. Of course, you knew what it was called.

That would've been an interesting game, considering the NSL started in 1977.

They may as well just all merge with the only truly successful manifestation of their code and join the NFL.

Rugby is struggling in Australia but thriving elsewhere. Not gonna happen in our lifetime.

True. Genuine Rugby fans would find this sort of thing abhorrent. League fans, on the other hand, would talk about how great it was for generations.

You mean like how the NSL champions played the VFL back in the 1964?



Edited by afromanGT: 9/12/2013 10:45:09 AM

Sounds like a gimmick.

Wonder what other sports would resort to this?

:roll:

Stupid gimmicky idea. For mine, if they wanted it to be the decisive assessment of which game is better / which players are better (which seems to be the main motivator for most fans), they'd play 80 minutes of Union one week, 80 minutes of league the next and if one side could win both then they'd have claim.

For those who say its a sign of desperate times calling for desperate measures, that's only true to a point - this idea has been floated for more than a decade, possibly longer; back when Rugby was a much more powerful player in the Aus/global sporting landscape.

Not really. It's been done before and will be done again. The ARU's debt would be a factor in doing it now though, and this surely will be just to generate interest for a game or series between the two Australian teams

My thoughts exactly.

\
No. See yourself out.

Maybe they should have a competition to see which code can embarass itself more on a night out on the town.
Or, who can give the best king hit on the field, or maybe ear biting or pitch urination or.....