Agreed, can see what your saying but to say that a white England team isn't capable to beat the Aussies is a harsh

You are aware that London is a pretty big place, aren't you?



Yes, but I think you're struggling to comprehend basic English... Did I say the game should only be interested in black people? No. so no i haven't said that. try again



opinions are opinions mate, lets discuss the facts. Fact - black people are disproportionately represented in league. start there, find me an opinion to trump that........... shall i wait or get my coat?



token, token, token, token, token, token etc. You're barmy mate. you still seem to think i'm of the opinion there are no great white athletes, but that's not what i've said, ever.

go browse the dailymail or something mate. obviously insecure white person is obvious.



My agenda or issue is that black people are better athletes, so yes i have one. this is only problematic or aggressive however if you're an insecure bigoted white man.

I'm white, it doesn't bother me acknowledging that the black population of britain generally are better athletes than the white population.

We're already a laughing stock, btw, i'm just suggesting a way to stop the rot. But hey, lets just pretend white people aren't being muscled out of the game in Australia because they're athletically lesser than their counterparts, and lets pretend we can field all white players for infinite and win based on the superior skill and talent of the SL competition

I don't care if its harsh, it's true. We sure as hell aren't going to trump them for skill, how else do you think we'll do it? be reasonable

Can I first say that I think we will never have an all white team because there are some brilliant black players in our league and in the squad currently. I think super league is getting stronger and getting more quality players starting at younger age and we are closing the gap. Who ever wants to play RL be wether white or black we should be training them up to become better athletes rather than saying the British game is too white.

Blacks aren't better athletes really, just as whites aren't better athletes. Every race has examples of strong, big, fast people aswell as it's share of unathletic slobs. You might look at Olympic events and see the sprinting events (for men especially) being dominated by Black folk but then you look at things like swimming and wrestling being dominated by whites. No race is superior to any other. If blacks were much more better suited to RL then they would be dominating RL.

Maybe there are so many whites playing the game because they have far more powerful brains than blacks so are much better equipped for Rugby. Sounds rediculous doesn't it? But then again, so does your argument.

not gonna bother getting into an argument about race, but on the london debate i agree RL is a nothing sport down there. i spend about half of the year in bromley as i work in london. i wanted to watch the grand final the other year no pubs in the area would put it on as wales under 21s were playing norway or summat.
im not saying the RFL aren't trying but the londoners (who i know anyway) just aren't interested at all.

great post mate and one we should end the whole argument/debate on!

thats the answer to keep rancid happy.... bring back slavery for all blacks and they will become bigger and stronger allowing them to play rugby league.let out on licence on game days

if you gave any Super league chairman/Coach 13 Black world beaters to pick from they would be picked.No racism in our sport and long may it continue.

There is a question of whether the game does enough to get into minority communities.

Its a question we should be constantly asking ourselves whether or not that there any explicit or implicit barriers or discouragement to minorities either entering or staying or progressing in the sport.

Its certainly not a question we should be asking as to whether we need more black players because they are somehow inherently better.

There are some unsavory views being expressed on this thread (a minority of the views expressed it must be said) and i would hope it was clumsy wording rather than anything else but we should stay away from some of the stereotyping we have seen. There are many facets to creating an RL player, it is naive to think that one racial group is genetically predisposed to being better at it or that they have specific aspects at which they excel.

Whilst it seems to be a "positive stereotype" (if thats not an oxymoron) to say that black players may be bigger, stronger, faster etc that can result in young black players being pushed towards positions like winger/centre and prop because of that stereotype when maybe halfback or hooker would be a better fit for their specific skills.

I'm worried about player like Ryan Atkins. where will the mixed race lads fit in Rancid's Apartheid League?

Can't be d reading through all this rubbish but the be all and end all is that if you're good enough then you're the right colour.

Yes. As is Yorkshire. Whats your point?

Isn't that a bit...like...racist?

in response to the question - i think the poster has a point. We (or england anyway... i am scottish) are simply missing out on a number of top athletes while large groups of ethnic minorities have such limited participation in RL. Some sports are quite honest and open that afro-carribean players offer a higher level of natural athleticism and in basketball for example, a number of european countries actively hunt for black players.

the poster makes the point that the NRL is full of polynesians, and he is correct. If GB (england) want to compete, they need to 'mine the seams' to get players from wherever they can. in the uk, the best athletes will gravitate to football (money) and the best rugby athletes to union (money). union has been signing a lot of great RL athletes (as opposed to great RL players) for some time, and so RL needs to get a handle on getting guys in from other 'non traditional' backgrounds. Polish guys... west indian guys.... both are large ethnic groups in the UK, and offer good levels of athleticism. Irish guys.... close to home, a big 'rugby culture' nowadays, and incredibly sport-orientated compared to their uk counterparts.... should also be recruited. And... south asians.... while not naturally built in general for collision sports, are a huge ethnic group in the RL heartlands, so will inevitably through sheer numbers unearth 1 or 2 good players if their participation in RL could be nurtured.

Encouraging the growth of RL among all these groups will pay dividends for Rugby League.

good thread, and a good point to raise.

I think the OP needs to learn the difference between opinion and fact.

Spot on - no further discussion required, unless it's about how junior clubs can do more to ensure they're accessible to all sections of society.

utter nonsense. Blacks are typically more explosive 'power' athletes as they have a higher proportion of fast twitch muscle. White europeans tend to have a higher amount of slow twitch muscle - allowing more absolute strength, but less explosive power.

If you honestly believe that all ethnicities are athletically equal, then ask yourself this:
why is the nrl (and super rugby, all blacks etc) full of polynesians? Why has the tiny island of american samoa seen some 60 players to the nfl.... more than many american football heartland areas with 100 times the population.???

Simply put, samoans (and tongans, cook islanders, nouvelle caledoniens etc) are blessed with an incredible ability to put on muscle, as well as a natural explosive power. they typically are big, but with a relatively low centre of gravity... ideal for rugby league (and union, nfl etc). They are rarely taller than about 1.92-1,93 metres, so no big gangly blokes. (unlike fijians... melanesians... who can be taller)

these guys have evolved over centuries, whereby their diet (heavily composed of taro) allows them to assimilate this carbohydrate based food in a way that westerners cannot.... they effectively process root vegetables in a way that we process protein.

if you honestly believe that your average pasty white, skinny 5 foot 7 northener... (or glaswegian, londoner... etc) can match these guys in terms of natural athleticism, then you are having a laugh. they can train hard though, and improve their physique, strength, power, pace. But... the polynesians (and often afro-caribbeans too) have a big natural advantage. who was the last white bloke to win the 100m olympic gold? scotsman alan wells in 1980. 32 years ago.

in the previous 4 nations (the one down under...) englands backline looked totally outsized, outmuscled and outpaced by a bigger, more athletic, stronger more imposing aussie 7. The gap closed slightly this year (2011), but was still noticeable - right across the park.

he was not being racist at all. what is racist about that - it is like saying that japan are at a disadvantage at basketball, as their players are generally not as tall. Scotland is at a disadvantage against jamaica at sprinting... our athletes are not as naturally quick/explosive.

the same can be said about Rugby League. New zealanders are aware of this... the 'white flight' in kids rugby union as white parents stop their kids playing as their polynesian counterparts are bigger, faster and far stronger... despite being the same age.

Pseudo-biological stereotypes which perpetuate a mythical heirarchy of race are racist, yes.

- 8 big fast polynesians, 4 agressive abrasive physical maoris, and 1 little white bloke with 6 on his back... the 'brains of the operation'. In keeping with the racial sterotyping, the new zealanders will also be laughing at your team for being weedy, slow and fat.

The editor of the NZ herald doesn't think such thoughts are racist. while people on here are hand wringing, they go with an editorial: www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/artic ... id=3584192 "european teenagers vs bulkier polynesians"

The editor of the NZ herald doesn't think such thoughts are racist. while people on here are hand wringing, they go with an editorial: www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/artic ... id=3584192 "european teenagers vs bulkier polynesians"

Does anybody know what the participation percentages are in comparison to the UK population? I would hazard a guess that the percentage is slightly higher than the population percentage which is around 8% I think. If each starting 13 has more than one player from a BME background then they'll be above that average.

I'm in agreement though about the issue of participation at lower levels of the game and in coaching set ups as well.

So the natural conclusion to reach would be that 30 years ago White Europeans were genetically different, right? I mean, that's the reasoning we're employing here, aren't we? A causes B; B exists; therefore A is the cause.

Consider this statement, which is also backed up by results. 'Dentists are genetically predisposed to play Rugby Union.' A causes B; B exists; therefore A is the cause. You might wish to respond to that statement, which is presented as a "fact", with the counter argument "the amateur status of the game favoured an interest from participants from a particular socio-economic background, of which dentists were a part", thus showing that my statement was a gross misrepresentation and simplification of the multiplicity and complexity of dentistry.


Long distance running has nothing to do with racial traits. (In fact, it's worth pointing out that races are artificial (man-made) categories and do not exist naturally. One could argue with just as much legitimacy that blue eyes or ginger hair represented categories of humans.) It is to do with hemoglobin-oxygen affinity which is altered with exposure to different altitudes.


My opinions aren't formed by anything lefty or pc-mad, rather scientific and academic literature.

You can also extend this theory to social class because it exists there and it's why RL players will always be better than RU players. Sons that come from a long line of tough men tend to be tougher than sons that come from a long line of, say, members of the gentry. It doesn't explain though why the West Indies haven't produced any great fast bowlers for twenty odd years.