Been here a while.

[MARYROSE02]

7 hours ago, Bulya said:

Not aimed at me obviously, but Origin is far more important.  Everybody knows that...

I went to see Australia play England or Great Britain in a RL test back in the early 1980's at the SCG and an Aussie guy near me spent the entire game abusing Wally Lewis which was my first introduction to Origin rivalry. I always want NSW to win but winning the Ashes (for England) is more important!

[Dusty Plains]

On 29/07/2019 at 15:54, MARYROSE02 said:

There was a time - 1989 to 2003 - when I no longer wanted England to win; I wanted Australia to lose. I was sick not just of losing every Ashes series, but having to put up with the sniggers on 9 News between newscaster  - Hendo perhaps, and sports reporter. (Ken Sutcliffe?) "Well, we've thrashed those Pommies again" or words to that effect. Add in the "jokes" - "Let's reduce the Ashes to a three test series." "Let's play our Sheilas against the Poms instead." "Not a single Pommie player would get into our team." And then 2005 came along and changed everything and now I just want England to win.

Here's a counter-question for you, although it's probably only relevant if you are from NSW or Queensland. "Which is more important? Winning Origin or winning The Ashes?"

Last bit First. Definitely winning State of Origin would be at the top of my list.  Its the biggest single game in the rugby code in the southern hemisphere, at least. ( Union and/ or League). it also keeps that strange game of AFL properly in its place, down in Melbourne. 

 When I was in high School in Sydney in 1970s ( showing my age there folks) the NSW school winter sport curriculum  was largely occupied by Rugby Union and Netball, hockey etc.. Most of us  in my high School wanted to, one-day, wear the Green and Gold in Rugby.  Boys playing AFL in schools will never be able to wear the Green and Gold which confirms that AFL is a boutique version of football, at best.

First bit last. Good on you for being offended by Australian Cricket commentators.   I also get offended by English commentators and boorish cricket fans.

[Gbye grey sky]

6 minutes ago, Dusty Plains said:

Last bit First. Definitely winning State of Origin would be at the top of my list.  Its the biggest single game in the rugby code in the southern hemisphere, at least. ( Union and/ or League). it also keeps that strange game of AFL properly in its place, down in Melbourne. 

 When I was in high School in Sydney in 1970s ( showing my age there folks) the NSW school winter sport curriculum  was largely occupied by Rugby Union and Netball, hockey etc.. Most of us  in my high School wanted to, one-day, wear the Green and Gold in Rugby.  Boys playing AFL in schools will never be able to wear the Green and Gold which confirms that AFL is a boutique version of football, at best.

First bit last. Good on you for being offended by Australian Cricket commentators.   I also get offended by English commentators and boorish cricket fans.

State of Origin is not a single game!

[Dusty Plains]

4 minutes ago, Gbye grey sky said:

State of Origin is not a single game!

Thanks. Where I come from football matches form incemental parts of the larger "game", the latter being the collective rather than the instance or singular . I see your point to the contrary though. 

[Dusty Plains]

1 hour ago, MARYROSE02 said:

I went to see Australia play England or Great Britain in a RL test back in the early 1980's at the SCG and an Aussie guy near me spent the entire game abusing Wally Lewis which was my first introduction to Origin rivalry. I always want NSW to win but winning the Ashes (for England) is more important!

Fair enough.

In relation to State of Origin RL and Wally Lewis, it pains me, as a NSW fan, to admit that Wally Lewis was the greatest State of Origin player, at least up to and throughout the time that he represented Queensland.  Also a darn good bloke. Throughout his playing career he was aware of his own challenges insofar as his epilepsy was concerned, and that the next tackle could have set it off.

 

[MARYROSE02]

6 hours ago, Dusty Plains said:

Last bit First. Definitely winning State of Origin would be at the top of my list.  Its the biggest single game in the rugby code in the southern hemisphere, at least. ( Union and/ or League). it also keeps that strange game of AFL properly in its place, down in Melbourne. 

 When I was in high School in Sydney in 1970s ( showing my age there folks) the NSW school winter sport curriculum  was largely occupied by Rugby Union and Netball, hockey etc.. Most of us  in my high School wanted to, one-day, wear the Green and Gold in Rugby.  Boys playing AFL in schools will never be able to wear the Green and Gold which confirms that AFL is a boutique version of football, at best.

First bit last. Good on you for being offended by Australian Cricket commentators.   I also get offended by English commentators and boorish cricket fans.

One of the things that came to the fore when the Aussies were kings of the cricketing world was their sledging, epitomised by I think Steve Waugh's term "Mental disintegration" so when the Barmy Army appeared I loved the way that they sledged the Aussie cricketers (the England cricketers seemingly too scared to do so, which might be why we liked recruiting South Africans?) and the way that the Aussies hated it.

It's funny but all the Aussie cricketers I'd assumed to be nasty when they played cricket - Lillee, Thomson, Rod Marsh, Ian Chappell, Allan Border, Glenn McGrath - all turned out to be nice once they'd retired.

I did hope that the on-field sledging from all teams would stop after Phil Hughes was killed but it seems to be creeping back?

I like AFL probably more than RL or RU although I have my teams in both AFL and NRL - Swans and Storm - and I always look forward to Origin. Perhaps the inter-state rivalries are not as intense in the AFL states? There was definitely no solidarity between the two WA AFL teams against "The Eastern States" when I was over there. The NRL would love to get the kind of crowds that the AFL draws.

[Bulya]

8 hours ago, Dusty Plains said:

Last bit First. Definitely winning State of Origin would be at the top of my list.  Its the biggest single game in the rugby code in the southern hemisphere, at least. ( Union and/ or League). it also keeps that strange game of AFL properly in its place, down in Melbourne. 

 When I was in high School in Sydney in 1970s ( showing my age there folks) the NSW school winter sport curriculum  was largely occupied by Rugby Union and Netball, hockey etc.. Most of us  in my high School wanted to, one-day, wear the Green and Gold in Rugby.  Boys playing AFL in schools will never be able to wear the Green and Gold which confirms that AFL is a boutique version of football, at best.

First bit last. Good on you for being offended by Australian Cricket commentators.   I also get offended by English commentators and boorish cricket fans.

Strange game AFL is still the biggest game in Australia, and dominates WA, Tas,,Vic, WA, and NSW up to the ‘beer line’ or true border.  Was the biggest game in the ACT until formation of the Raiders in the NRL.  Rugby has always been a distant last of the four codes played, and is pretty much ‘dead in the water’ in Australia these days (thank God). 

[ali]

4 hours ago, Bulya said:

Strange game AFL is still the biggest game in Australia, and dominates WA, Tas,,Vic, WA, and NSW up to the ‘beer line’ or true border.  Was the biggest game in the ACT until formation of the Raiders in the NRL.  Rugby has always been a distant last of the four codes played, and is pretty much ‘dead in the water’ in Australia these days (thank God). 

When my son first started refereeing football (soccer to some) he started running the line for the Private Schools league - great  atmosphere as they played a number of sports on the same day and Rugby was one.  I'm sure there are public schools that play - but it is I think predominantly played at the big private schools here in WA.

[Dusty Plains]

18 hours ago, Bulya said:

Strange game AFL is still the biggest game in Australia, and dominates WA, Tas,,Vic, WA, and NSW up to the ‘beer line’ or true border.  Was the biggest game in the ACT until formation of the Raiders in the NRL.  Rugby has always been a distant last of the four codes played, and is pretty much ‘dead in the water’ in Australia these days (thank God). 

Strange indeed.  What other code awards a player one point if they miss the kick at goal?

[Dusty Plains]

20 hours ago, MARYROSE02 said:

One of the things that came to the fore when the Aussies were kings of the cricketing world was their sledging, epitomised by I think Steve Waugh's term "Mental disintegration" so when the Barmy Army appeared I loved the way that they sledged the Aussie cricketers (the England cricketers seemingly too scared to do so, which might be why we liked recruiting South Africans?) and the way that the Aussies hated it.

It's funny but all the Aussie cricketers I'd assumed to be nasty when they played cricket - Lillee, Thomson, Rod Marsh, Ian Chappell, Allan Border, Glenn McGrath - all turned out to be nice once they'd retired.

I did hope that the on-field sledging from all teams would stop after Phil Hughes was killed but it seems to be creeping back?

I like AFL probably more than RL or RU although I have my teams in both AFL and NRL - Swans and Storm - and I always look forward to Origin. Perhaps the inter-state rivalries are not as intense in the AFL states? There was definitely no solidarity between the two WA AFL teams against "The Eastern States" when I was over there. The NRL would love to get the kind of crowds that the AFL draws.

All national teams sledge the opposition from time-to-time  All of the national cricket teams have been called out for ball tampering, with some admitting  systemic tampering of the ball throughout an entire Ashes series (England) , or have been caught in the act (Australia).   The Rugby League State of Origin filled the new Perth stadium with a record crowd.  AFL has not achieved that. 

Still, each to their own.I hope the Sydney Swans have a better season next year perhaps.

[MARYROSE02]

They did get a big crowd at Optus stadium for Origin. Haven't they managed to fill it for an Eagles v Dockers game yet?  A guy was telling me the other night  in between ranting about what he saw as Buddy Franklin's malign influence on the Swans - not that I agreed with him - that the Storm have the best NRL crowds after the Broncos. I started going for the Storm because I didn't think there was any chance of an NRL team thriving in Melbourne.  Previously, I'd worked my way through a number of Sydney teams trying to find "the one" - Wests, Norths, Souths, Balmain, Canterbury and Parramatta. My sister-in-law and my brother never tire of telling me about Billy Slater's alleged crimes.

The 1st Ashes test starts tonight I think. There was an excellent article in the Sydney Morning Herald about the 2005 Ashes 2nd test at I think Edgebaston.

[Canada2Australia]

Rugby is gaining popularity throughout Canada. Cricket is slowly catching on as well,  thanks to UK and East Indian immigration. My home city in Winnipeg just built two new permanent cricket pitches in Parc La Berriere (La Berriere Park)  

Edited July 31, 2019 by Canada2Australia

[Bulya]

7 hours ago, Dusty Plains said:

All national teams sledge the opposition from time-to-time  All of the national cricket teams have been called out for ball tampering, with some admitting  systemic tampering of the ball throughout an entire Ashes series (England) , or have been caught in the act (Australia).   The Rugby League State of Origin filled the new Perth stadium with a record crowd.  AFL has not achieved that. 

Still, each to their own.I hope the Sydney Swans have a better season next year perhaps.

Origin is a one off and will fill any stadium.

First time for Adelaide next year

[NicF]

3 hours ago, Bulya said:

Origin is a one off and will fill any stadium.

First time for Adelaide next year

Be interesting to see how that goes.  Rugby not a particularly obvious sport here in SA but people do like to get out and watch stuff live.

[Bulya]

17 minutes ago, NicF said:

Be interesting to see how that goes.  Rugby not a particularly obvious sport here in SA but people do like to get out and watch stuff live.

Not a WA sport either but they filled the new stadium.  Origin is unique, and sports fans of all kinds want to see it live 

[MARYROSE02]

On 31/07/2019 at 22:02, Dusty Plains said:

Strange indeed.  What other code awards a player one point if they miss the kick at goal?

That is what makes it unique! And the best games i.e. the closest are won or lost by one point. Perhaps Gaelic footie has a similar system? I don't know enough about it but there are enough similarities between the two codes for them to play a hybrid game?

[MARYROSE02]

On 17/06/2019 at 11:37, Dm1 said:

Most people i know that has moved here did have a good life in their home country. They moved for the chance of a better one or just for something different. The same principle could be used with a car or house ir any aspect of live yet people change cars and move house etc.. 

That's an interesting point. I don't know why I came to Australia and, frustratingly, whilst I started a diary in 1978, the year I left, I never wrote down the reasons, not for better weather, nor a better job,  or better lifestyle. I think it was just to have an adventure, the only one I've really had.

Perhaps when you make the decision to come to Australia it subtly changes your mindset from being perfectly happy in the UK to "having" to make that move; you can't go back. Well, you can of course and I did, for a while.

I'm a member of two Facebook groups, both rooted in nostalgia, one for my local village in England and the other in Sydney, and I enjoy them equally. But ultimately, I live here in Sydney.

[MARYROSE02]

On 17/06/2019 at 12:00, Toots said:

Yes they do but some people move 10,000 miles from home hoping for a better life and find that it isn't any better.   We moved nearly 40 years ago when life was very easy here.  It's not easy any more.

I wouldn't say that life in Sydney in 1979 was easy but it's hard in 2019! I don''t think I would swap my flat for a room in a private hotel with no private facilities in my room. Perhaps I've just learned to cope better after 40 years.

[Bulya]

1 hour ago, MARYROSE02 said:

I wouldn't say that life in Sydney in 1979 was easy but it's hard in 2019! I don''t think I would swap my flat for a room in a private hotel with no private facilities in my room. Perhaps I've just learned to cope better after 40 years.

You’ve never come across as a wimp, always a have-a-go type of person.  They’re the ones who make it here 

[Toots]

2 hours ago, MARYROSE02 said:

I wouldn't say that life in Sydney in 1979 was easy but it's hard in 2019! I don''t think I would swap my flat for a room in a private hotel with no private facilities in my room. Perhaps I've just learned to cope better after 40 years.

We came in 1981.  No problem at all finding jobs.  Rented a nice flat in Neutral Bay (Sydney) for a very reasonable rent and managed to save money to put toward buying a block of land and building a house in Perth 1.5 years later helped with the little bit of money we saved when we sold our terrace house in the UK.  I don't remember it being hard and we managed to enjoy a stress fee life but  after babies arrived I didn't go back to work full time until the youngest started school so we tightened our belts during that time.  We never over extended on our financial situation.  Our only debt was the mortgage.  We never had a new car during that time.

[Dusty Plains]

2 hours ago, MARYROSE02 said:

I wouldn't say that life in Sydney in 1979 was easy but it's hard in 2019! I don''t think I would swap my flat for a room in a private hotel with no private facilities in my room. Perhaps I've just learned to cope better after 40 years.

I feel your pain. I grew up in Sydney, got married in the 70s and bought a house in the late 70's,  but only on the periphery. We could not afford to live close to to town. In the 1970's there were jobs galore. Australia's post modern golden age was in the 70's and 80's. At that time Australia has the world's best standard of living, the No1 quality of life and the Australian dollar was worth, at one stage, $1.28 American. 

It took me 1 hour and 15 minutes to drive, my  1974 VW Kombi Van from home to work in South Sydney.

When I retired 3 years ago, that same journey  took 2 and a half hours on a good day. that is 5 hours travel per day at best.

We were in drought, but there was no water restrictions back then.Warraganba dam was full most of the timeCrime was low,  I subsequently worked across several continents, including Asia North America and the UK ( Europe of cause).

The point is ...........immigration!  

 I am not saying that you and others on here are part of the problem,, well at least necessarily.  Most people are entitled to seek a better life, and back then it probably was a better life for immigrants coming to Australia.

However that is what has wrecked Sydney.  There are far too many people trying to utilise road rail water supplies and a nyriad of other factors that were never designed for massive immigration.

That why life is "tough" at the moment. I hope you feel my pain also.

Edited August 2, 2019 by Dusty Plains

[Toots]

11 minutes ago, Dusty Plains said:

I feel your pain. I grew up in Sydney, got married in the 70s and bought a house in the late 70's,  but only on the periphery. We could not afford to live close to to town. In the 1970's there were jobs galore. Australia's post modern golden age was in the 70's and 80's. At that time Australia has the world's best standard of living, the No1 quality of life and the Australian dollar was worth, at one stage, $1.28 American. 

It took me 1 hour and 15 minutes to drive, my  1974 VW Kombi Van from home to work in South Sydney.

When I retired 3 years ago, that same journey  took 2 and a half hours on a good day. that is 5 hours travel per day at best.

We were in drought, but there was no water restrictions back then.Warraganba dam was full most of the timeCrime was low,  I subsequently worked across several continents, including Asia North America and the UK ( Europe of cause).

The point is ...........immigration!  

 I am not saying that you and others on here are part of the problem,, well at least necessarily.  Most people are entitled to seek a better life, and back then it probably was a better life for immigrants coming to Australia.

However that is what has wrecked Sydney.  There are far too many people trying to utilise road rail water supplies and a nyriad of other factors that were never designed for massive immigration.

That why life is "tough" at the moment. I hope you feel my pain also.

I think the same could be said about Melbourne.

That's why we decided to retire to Tassie.  It wouldn't suit many but it suits us.  

 

[Saurer Pfirsich]

1 hour ago, Dusty Plains said:

I feel your pain. I grew up in Sydney, got married in the 70s and bought a house in the late 70's,  but only on the periphery. We could not afford to live close to to town. In the 1970's there were jobs galore. Australia's post modern golden age was in the 70's and 80's. At that time Australia has the world's best standard of living, the No1 quality of life and the Australian dollar was worth, at one stage, $1.28 American. 

It took me 1 hour and 15 minutes to drive, my  1974 VW Kombi Van from home to work in South Sydney.

When I retired 3 years ago, that same journey  took 2 and a half hours on a good day. that is 5 hours travel per day at best.

We were in drought, but there was no water restrictions back then.Warraganba dam was full most of the timeCrime was low,  I subsequently worked across several continents, including Asia North America and the UK ( Europe of cause).

The point is ...........immigration!  

 I am not saying that you and others on here are part of the problem,, well at least necessarily.  Most people are entitled to seek a better life, and back then it probably was a better life for immigrants coming to Australia.

However that is what has wrecked Sydney.  There are far too many people trying to utilise road rail water supplies and a nyriad of other factors that were never designed for massive immigration.

That why life is "tough" at the moment. I hope you feel my pain also.

Really interested to read this. It sounds like life in those days was generally better for Australians by pretty much any index you could measure it, so, why did sucessive Australian governments aggressively follow policies designed to increase the population? Was it to create a pool of cheap labour, or to drive up property prices, or was there a fear that that golden age you referenced was unsustainable without a bigger population with the skills to drive it forwards? Or, to be Sydney-specific, was the problem that when you (the Australian Government that is) went big on immigration, the result was that the newcomers headed to major cities like Sydney and Melbourne, rather than areas with smaller populations who probably needed them more? As a result, cities like Sydney overheat and your commuting time doubles.

I've lived in Melbourne for 11 years, and the city has changed for the worst in that short time in my opinion. As a newcomer, I'm part of the problem. I'm a Social Worker, and there are any number of Australians who could do my job as well as I do, but with an Australia wife, moving out here and getting a job was ridiculously easy for me - relative to what other foreigners have to go through that is. I'm just not sure what Australia has gained by growing it's population in this way? By letting people like me in? The same could be said of the UK. Sure, the economy might be stronger, but does that necessarily improve the lot of the average family who find themselves struggling to find affordable child-care, the first time buyers, or the guy whose commute used to be 75 mins, and now finds it's doubled? 

I don't think it's unreasonable for people to wonder what the point of 'Big Australia' was, because it sounds like you were all better off back in that 70's golden age.

[Lavers]

1 hour ago, Saurer Pfirsich said:

Really interested to read this. It sounds like life in those days was generally better for Australians by pretty much any index you could measure it, so, why did sucessive Australian governments aggressively follow policies designed to increase the population? Was it to create a pool of cheap labour, or to drive up property prices, or was there a fear that that golden age you referenced was unsustainable without a bigger population with the skills to drive it forwards? Or, to be Sydney-specific, was the problem that when you (the Australian Government that is) went big on immigration, the result was that the newcomers headed to major cities like Sydney and Melbourne, rather than areas with smaller populations who probably needed them more? As a result, cities like Sydney overheat and your commuting time doubles.

I've lived in Melbourne for 11 years, and the city has changed for the worst in that short time in my opinion. As a newcomer, I'm part of the problem. I'm a Social Worker, and there are any number of Australians who could do my job as well as I do, but with an Australia wife, moving out here and getting a job was ridiculously easy for me - relative to what other foreigners have to go through that is. I'm just not sure what Australia has gained by growing it's population in this way? By letting people like me in? The same could be said of the UK. Sure, the economy might be stronger, but does that necessarily improve the lot of the average family who find themselves struggling to find affordable child-care, the first time buyers, or the guy whose commute used to be 75 mins, and now finds it's doubled? 

I don't think it's unreasonable for people to wonder what the point of 'Big Australia' was, because it sounds like you were all better off back in that 70's golden age.

These are all valid points but the biggest point being is the fact that the worlds population has more than doubled since 1970....so we have to go somewhere.

Congestion is just way of life in most parts but more so in your bigger cities.

 

[MARYROSE02]

7 hours ago, Toots said:

We came in 1981.  No problem at all finding jobs.  Rented a nice flat in Neutral Bay (Sydney) for a very reasonable rent and managed to save money to put toward buying a block of land and building a house in Perth 1.5 years later helped with the little bit of money we saved when we sold our terrace house in the UK.  I don't remember it being hard and we managed to enjoy a stress fee life but  after babies arrived I didn't go back to work full time until the youngest started school so we tightened our belts during that time.  We never over extended on our financial situation.  Our only debt was the mortgage.  We never had a new car during that time.

I must have been close to you as I was living in Miller Street, Cammeray in 1981 having spent 1979 and most of 1980 in Neutral Bay, Hayes Street first in that private hotel, then Yeo Street where I also worked for a while. It took 3 months to get my first job, looking in both Perth and Sydney. I've been meaning to go down to Circular Quay, take the ferry to Neutral Bay, walk up to Military Road, have a beer in The Oaks, then make my way back, bus maybe or walk to North Sydney and get the train. I shared flats with my brothers.