Jump to content

Talk:Australia national rugby league team

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


National kit

[edit]

Any reason for the removal of the colours??? I know it was just the base colours and didn't have the V on the jersey but still... I'm going to revert them unless you have a better idea or are going to create the V and everything else.

Tiburon 04:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, coz there's no V. It's just plain inaccurate without it. Surely there's a better way. Can we put the V's on the jersey and the stripes on the shorts and socks? I think the socks are green too, not yellow. If we could get it lookin like the real thing that'd be awesome. Or how about just the jersey that you see on most former Australian captains' pages?--Jeff79 06:28, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The V's should be easy enough to do, will change the socks now. In all honesty not a huge fan of those pictures that are plastered all over the former Aus. captains pages.
Tiburon 12:46, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed up the gold chevron (now it's a double) and the colours. Bongomanrae 05:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to emphasise that Bogomanrae is VERY CORRECT in referring to the "V" as a CHEVRON. I made the changes in the article. Proberton (talk) 16:29, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kit socks

[edit]

Any chance we could leave them gold/yellow as while they are a combo of gold/green they seem to be more predominately gold. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Unless someone can create the actual ones.--Tiburon 06:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry about that, I guess those are the new socks, I never realised they looked like that before. Also I'm pretty sure the V is a double V. Dunno if that's possible or not.--Jeff79 06:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hah yeah after i created the single V I looked at some pictures and saw the double. So that may take some time but i'll get that done in the next few days.--Tiburon 08:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wicked, The kiwis have a double too I think.--Jeff79 05:40, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Home stadium

[edit]

How on earth is this defined as Telstra Stadium?--dan, dan and dan 22:05, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent question--Jeff79 07:44, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as i know they don't have a home stadium {they tend to alternate between Sydney and Brisbane}.CEP78 01:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also pretty sure that's the case. I think in any sport national teams don't have "home grounds" because they aren't the same as club teams. It's a home stadium if it's in the country. It's hardly going to be the other country's home stadium!--Jeff79 02:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree.... "home grounds" are the provenance of domestic teams. The analogy doesn't stretch. Proberton (talk) 18:40, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Returning to this topic...why is it now Suncorp? The field is not compulsory, wouldn't it make more sense to leave it empty? Gialloneri (talk) 00:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. The field shouldn't be appearing in national sides' infoboxes.--Jeff79 (talk) 02:52, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Representative Players

[edit]

I dunno what everyone else thinks, but I'm a believer in a player only being credited for playing for the Kangaroos after he actually runs out onto the field in the green and gold. Alot of people are keen to edit and update Australian rugby league pages, and that's great. But I think there's a danger that players announced for a future test will be credited with playing for Australia on their pages (or this one) when in fact they haven't. The team that actually runs out on the field in a test match is far more relevant/interesting in an enyclopedic context than the team announced to potentially play in a future match. If people are putting players' international selection on pages before a match is played, but the player doesn't actually play on the night, I hope they'll ensure that those pages are updated to reflect that. Just my thoughts for the talk page.--Jeff79 20:43, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. To that end I ammended the'latest team lineup' to include Cooper Cronk as the starting halfback- Thurstons rolled an ankle and didn't play. Proberton (talk) 16:31, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Australian national football team

[edit]

If one searches the words 'Australian national football team' they're taken to the Australian soccer team's page. Here is a discussion about whether it should lead to the disambiguation page (much like Football in Australia does), as it is a highly ambiguous term. Thought it was a discussion directly relevant to this article.--Jeff79 22:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2008 world cup

[edit]

will the games in the 2008 world cup count as tests? SpecialWindler 09:18, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In most things I read it seems they're not exactly "Tests" but a separate category, but of equal importance. Like when describing a famous international player's career it often reads "... he appeared in a total of X Tests and World Cup matches. Tour matches against local teams are separate again and not usually counted. But I guess what you're asking is do we include them in our representative match totals on wikipedia. If the word 'Tests' specifically is used, I don't think we can. But just appearances for Australia, I think we can.--Jeff79 19:29, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the correct term for a game between national sides is Internationals, I'm guessing but doens't a test usually refer to internationals that constitute a test series? Proberton (talk) 03:47, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who is Jonathon Moddel? - he is listed as being a part of the squad as of April 2007, and he has apparently played 17 tests for Australia and is a winger from Wests Tigers. As I am a member of the club, I think I would have probably heard of him - but I never have. Can somebody either a) delete him, or b) find the smarty pants who deleted somebody and put themselves in their place? Weststigersbob 06:47, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

[edit]

Needs top try-scorer. I believe it's Mal Meninga?--Jeff79 (talk) 01:18, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ken Irvine, 33 tries [6] Proberton (talk) 18:51, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Captaincy in Infobox

[edit]

Shouldn't the Infox box describe the Current Captain? Proberton (talk) 18:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two questions:

1. I'm wondering if we should be discussing the merits of Captain vs Incumbent vs Current Captain....

Cameron Smith is the most recent ( as a Melbourne Storm supporter I have no problem with this) but isn't he ACTING captain in the absence of Lockyer? Is the Kangaroo captain position like the Australian cricket team that changes only on retirement

2. It strikes me as odd that we're using the flagicon next to the name of the Australian Captain. Sure this is great for domestic sides. Isn't it a given that an Australian will be the captain of the an Australian national team?

Proberton (talk) 14:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely shouldn't be a flagicon next to anyone but the coach. The captain issue I'm unsure of. Most recent captain would be the easiest to cite.--Jeff79 (talk) 05:32, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would have it as Darren Lockyer, he is the Australian captain, he has done all the promotional work for the WC. I don't see Cam Smith as THE Australian captain until Locky is ruled out of the WC. Alexsanderson83 11:30, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article has Cameron Smith as Australian Captain. The Lockyer article has Lockyer as 'incumbent'. Which is it? As for promotional work, Cameron Smith has been more prominent in WC material here in Victoria, so it is safe to assume that there is a different 'face' in each major centre. Further, noone has answered my question yet- is the Kangaroo Captain comparable to the cricket team, where it is a position one keeps even when injured with an acting captain, or is it appointed each season? If it is the former then Lockyer is rightly the incumbent and Smith is ACTING Captain. Incidently, when was the last time Lockyer played an test match? Proberton (talk) 14:25, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Going on the last 3 days, Smith may not even be playing in the World Cup opener! Having said that, I'm going to remove the unslightly question marks somebody put against Smith's name. His spot in the Australian squad is not in jeopardy. Proberton (talk) 03:14, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard Lockyer described as injured Australian captain when on the sidelines. Probably not comparable to cricket, but I would say that he is 'the' captain at this point, until he relinquishes the role.Londo06 08:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2008 "POSSIBLE" world cup run on side

[edit]

I have a fundamental problem with this section. Since when did Wikipedia speculate? By its very nature its opinion and there isn't a footnote.

May I move that this section be deleted? Proberton (talk) 16:48, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. These "possible" squads are one of my pet hates and so blatantly against wikipedia policy. 'Most recent team' (for the Kangaroos that would be the Centenary Test) is far more appropriate.--Jeff79 (talk) 17:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Righto. I'll give it 24hrs more, just so people can see it on their watchlists, then its gone. Proberton (talk) 03:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relevance ?

[edit]

Players injured or suspended in the context of the 2008 RWC list ? What are we saying, that were they not injured or suspended they would be in the squad. How do we really know that ? Probably true in the case of Hoffman, Mason, Bird. Far from certain in the case of Poore. And unlikely with Buderus going to SL. In any case this is all speculation and must go. -Sticks66 11:10, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right on.--Jeff79 (talk) 12:54, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Match Officials

[edit]

What do NRL and Toyota Cup officials have to do with the national team? I am not even sure they are worth listing on the NRL and Toyota Cup pages, let alone the national team page. Move to delete section? Rugbyhelp (talk) 15:04, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, I'm fighting the same battle on the New Zealand Kiwis page. International refs have nothing to with national teams. Mattlore (talk) 22:39, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Australia national basketball team which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 15:01, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sheens' Kangaroos, and Meninga's Kangaroos

[edit]

I was planning to include sections that are similar to the Kearney's Kiwis section in the New Zealand national rugby league team (which no one has yet made a comment as to whether that section can be kept or not) since I feel this will illustrate more information to the public. Could you please let me know as to whether or not I can include this ASAP because I am really keen to 'execute' this idea. Cheers - RugbyLeagueFan (talk) 02:36, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Australia national rugby league team. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:40, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Australia national rugby league team. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:21, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Australia national rugby league team. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:19, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Page move

[edit]

Was there a consensus reached on a page move that affects thousands of other pages?Fleets (talk) 04:32, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This page is clearly for the men's team, in the same way that the women's page is for the women's team. Therefore, the title should reflect this, rather than just calling it "the National Team" and implying that it is some kind of superior team to the women. Regardless of popularity, the men's team is no more important than the women's team and hence has no claim to be considered the National Team, relegating the women to something of an inferior off-shoot. Anyone who disagrees is simply displaying their sexiest views which would hardly be meeting the values of Wikipedia (and society in general). It's 2022 and this should even need to be discussed. Clifton9 (talk) 07:10, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe your view to be the most or least sexy as you put it. Wikipedia has no interest in politics, merely that there is clearly a primary topic for this page. If you wish to raise it again, please bring it to a wider audience at the Rugby League project, as this would be the second time that you've moved the page, and it has been rightly moved back on both occasions.Fleets (talk) 13:58, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well it only gets moved back by people who refuse to acknowledge women as equals. It has nothing to do with politics. It is simply equality. I have no intention to raise it at Rugby League project because as stated, it shouldn't even need discussing regarding of the sport, the nation, the topic. Clifton9 (talk) 01:47, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I can see what you are saying, but as Fleets says, the men's team is clearly the primary topic, unlike say the national hockey teams.
As per this discussion over a decade ago, it's best to discuss these kinds of page moves first to try and reach a consensus. If there is a consensus for a move after a discussion, then happy days; but at least be willing to have the discussion first. Storm machine (talk) 23:30, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Australia_national_rugby_league_team&oldid=1199197586"