Rugby league or Rugby Union ??

Question

im of the opinion the later is for puffs

Answer 1

Rugby League is by far the better of the two.
The scoring of tries is the ultimate way of winning a game, or it should be. In rugby league tries win matches, however in union it is often how many penalty goals that have been kicked that prove to be more beneficial to winning a game.
The ball is kept in play on average about twenty minutes more in a game of league compared to union, therefore there is more action to watch and leads to more entertainment.
League is tougher than union as there are know lineouts (used as a breather for the players), and as the ball isn't kicked out of play every couple of minutes the extra time that league players actually play rugby makes it tougher on their bodies.
Saying all this, union is still a good sport but just not nearly as good as Rugby League.
By the way I have never worn a flat cap, never had anything to do with pigeons, i'm definitely not homophobic, sexist, racist or ageist, and I have a degree from University.

Answer 2

depends if you are watching or playing
playing - union accommodates more body shapes and sizes from fat props, tiny half backs to big wingers. It also requires much wider skill set with a more tactical thinking by a much larger number of players. League prefers braun, muscles, athleticism and more braun... Not saying thats a bad thing, but for 90kg me, league usually ends in a 120 kg steamroller... There is a weird pleasure to league, running up and down and only making a few tackles and runs every now and then... But I love to get involved at every opportunity and League just does not have enough going on to keep me interested on the field.
watching - and it pains me to say it, but since they got rid of the rucking rule in union way back, league is the better game to watch. Union can on occasion have better matches, but 9 times out of 10 at this point in time, well even I, a diehard fan, loose interest.
further more, while union can accommodate more players and skills, it also is infinitely more complicated and requires understanding of, a feel for, and occasionally a bit of luck to understand some of the more grey area rules.
League have also mastered the art of good commentating which Union lacks in aus and also has atmosphere at matches. It has not always been the case and with a bit of luck union may catch up.
Historically too, League until very recently has been a more blue collar game, whereas union's heartland has always been more white collar..


Basically, if you like a simple straight forward game, no bells and whistles, just run jump catch tackle repeat... league is your sport
if you want something that has many different aspects and disciplines; and can accommodate different body shapes, union is better
Either way, your best bet is to learn both from a non bias perspective (fairly hard to do due to the diehards) and make a personal choice

Answer 3

Both games are great to play, They both require fitness and skill in both attack and defence. I think the defencive skills in league are of a slightly higher standard. However in saying that, the quality of defence in union has improved out of sight over the last 10 years.
Anyone who thinks thats union isnt a very tough hard game is a fool. I challenge anyone to get caught at the bottom of a ruck and then tell me the game isnt tough.
If union has one archilles heel, it is the technical nature of the game and how that leads to so many penalties. The constant blowing of the pea by the ref often drives spectators of the game nuts.

Answer 4

Which has the larger following in the UK? Union

Which is practised most widely internationally? Union

Which is the home of unintelligible pigeon fanciers ferret botherers? League

Which is the lest audience friendly with constant stop start phases of play and default turnovers on the sixth tackle? League

Which is the preferred sport of homophobic peasants? League

Which has players who take pride in thrashing around on the floor when "tackled" like a landed fish? League

Which has contributed to the rise in popularity of both codes both as a spectator sport and participative sport nationally. Union

Look at how many professional players have crossed over each way as an indication of which has more to offer the player

Not that I'm being regionally prejudiced but there is only one winner and its not the sport of cloth cap wearing, pigeon fecal stained, unsophisticated simpleton, homophobic, Luddite, drinkers of warm flat beer.

Answer 5

Got to be rugby union far more skill full league is dying out wont be around much longer now its all professional.

Answer 6

To be honest, I can't tell them apart. Both sports are played with an oblong-shaped ball that is carried by large men with tree trunks for legs. They charge into each other, take part in scrums and lineouts, can only pass backwards and the main aim in both aims is to score a try by crossing the goalline of the opposition- the ball MUST touch the ground over the line to do this.

Given that both sports involve a lot of bone-crunching tackles, I wouldn't dare call those who play either sport anything other than 'sir'.

Answer 7

League, Union is for public school boys from the home counties. League if for proper men!! I remember all the Union players at uni, with their blond curly hair and cars that daddy bought them. Defiantly ponces!!!!

Answer 8

Not sure if any of you are serious, how is union for poofs? League is obviously the wimp sport, you get tackled but then let go? Wtf. Union is where real strength is needed, you will see more big hits, league you see guys twitching on the ground until the tackler gets off, union is obviously better!

Answer 9

Union!!

Way more skills req'd. Allowing for more interesting strength v. weakness matches. Pack play against backs, running game against kicking game, finding ways to outwit your oponents. Not just game of "break the line".

I haven't played league. It looks like fun!

Answer 10

Union all the way!!! i dare you to say that to the ex england skipper and world cup rugby winner of 2003 MARTIN JOHNSON