Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 400 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, 38 years of history from Open Rugby to the present day.
Click here for the digital edition to read online via smartphone, tablet and desktop devices including iPhone, iPad, Android & Kindle HD.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 400
/ View a Gallery of all 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 400
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Yorkshire v Lancashire instead of England v The Exiles


  • Please log in to reply
94 replies to this topic

#21 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,901 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 12:08 AM

Was it really given a chance last time?


Yes and it was rubbish.

#22 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,490 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 12:20 AM

The RFL introduces an exiles game/games to give England a standard of opposition not otherwise available in the northern hemisphere (unless you want to consider the England Knights). Not a perfect solution, but at least it gives England the opportunity to play together as a team where the result is not a foregone conclusion. It might just help (can't really do any harm).

In a parallel universe somewhere, the RFL introduces a game between two traditional counties. This helps England's preparation - how?
"There are now more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs."

#23 OMEGA

OMEGA
  • Coach
  • 1,206 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 12:22 AM

The RFL introduces an exiles game/games to give England a standard of opposition not otherwise available in the northern hemisphere (unless you want to consider the England Knights). Not a perfect solution, but at least it gives England the opportunity to play together as a team where the result is not a foregone conclusion. It might just help (can't really do any harm).

In a parallel universe somewhere, the RFL introduces a game between two traditional counties. This helps England's preparation - how?


Jeez,
you better tell the Ausies to scrap State of Origin as it does'nt help the National team.

#24 MrPosh

MrPosh
  • Coach
  • 3,065 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 12:32 AM

I'm from Cambridgeshire and live in Lincolnshire. Who should I support?

Edited by MrPosh, 30 March 2013 - 12:34 AM.

People called Romans they go the house

#25 MrPosh

MrPosh
  • Coach
  • 3,065 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 12:32 AM

Oops

Edited by MrPosh, 30 March 2013 - 12:33 AM.

People called Romans they go the house

#26 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,490 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 12:49 AM

Jeez,
you better tell the Ausies to scrap State of Origin as it does'nt help the National team.


State of Origin offers three games where the standard is generally agreed to be a step up from NRL. When has Lancs v Yorks ever offered a contest more intense than a typical Super League game?

In addition, Australia's national side is tested regularly by games against their local rivals - something that England misses out on.
"There are now more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs."

#27 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,490 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 12:49 AM

I'm from Cambridgeshire and live in Lincolnshire. Who should I support?


Dorset!
"There are now more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs."

#28 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,610 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 05:24 AM

I was just wondering what people's thoughts area both replacing the England v the Exiles game with a return to Yorkshire v Lancashire matches?

It's a poor idea. England need to be playing games so that everyone us represented.

As things stand the Exiles games are little more than friendlies with little bite or motivation and in no way bear any resemblance to Test matches against Australia or New Zealand.

Yet we haven't won a series yet...

Wouldn't putting the best 26 players that England has to offer on a pitch to slug it out be a better way of preparing the England team for Test Matches against Australia and New Zealand than having the national team play uncompetitive exhibition matches against a bunch of has been players who don't really care?

Uncompetitive? We haven't won a series yet! I think that's pretty good preparation for the Aussies if you ask me!

Any thoughts? Or do people still think Wigan playing St Helens five times a year is the way forward?

Going on the defensive from the opening post kind of makes me think that you're already pretty confident this is a bad idea that people ain't agree with.
How would changing the Exiles game to Yorks/Lancs affect how many times SL clubs play each other? So why throw in that ridiculous strawman?
Posted Image

#29 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,610 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 05:45 AM

Well it works in amateur Rugby League and cricket.

Amateur sport isn't based in crowds.
County cricket is a club competition, not a rep competition.
Two completely and utterly ridiculous comparisons to make in this argument.

I just feel a proper Test trial with English players on both sides would be the better than uncompetitive friendlies against the Exiles.

Again, we haven't won a series yet. You can't keep calling it uncompetitive! Repeating yourself does not make this any more true.

If Rugby League supporters are too myopic to go and watch their own club's player to represent their part of the country then we might as well give up trying to raise the profile of the sport.

Having a go at the fans will not help your argument.
Why not have East Yorkshire vs West Yorkshire whilst we're at it? And if the fans don't support it, it's because they're too myopic to follow their part of the country...

Instead if splitting the country up, we could just have them play as there actual country?

Again Wigan playing St Helens 5 times a year isn't doing the trick at the moment.

Yet your proposal has no effect on how many times SL clubs play each other, so you can't keep using it in your argument.

Was it really given a chance last time? How long did it last for? 2 years?

3 years. It was given more of a chance than you're allowing the Exiles concept, so you can't use it as an argument to change the Exiles series.

The problem is that as things stand the Super League, squirrelled away on Sky TV, fails to attract the interest of those outside the sport and makes little impression on the general sporting public. To achieve that recognition and media profile something else needs to be offered. Competitive representative games that actually mean something and have the ability of appealing to non-rugby league supporters.

And your solution to that is to create a game that alienates about 5/6ths of the country?
The Exiles game may not be appealing, but it's certainly more appealing to someone from the South than Yorkshire vs Lancashire.
And what does it ACTUALLY mean? You say "something".

If club supporters are unwilling to support any other entity other than their club then any hope of expanding the sport is doomed to failure. Cricket, rugby union and in the main soccer fans don't solely support their club sides to the expense of everything else.

You are correct. They support their country. Yorkshire and Lancashire are not countries. England is. None of those sports you mention has professional rep games at county level. There's a reason why it's kept to amateur level.

I can't see how the England v Exiles games can ever be anything more than an exhibition because the Exiles have very little to play for. No national pride, no chance of career advancement and history. A nice exhibition but not preparation for playing the Australians.

Yet they've won every series so far. Not bad for a side with no motivation.

To sum up, I think when you're presenting an argument, you need to look at both sides of the coin, and not just the side you want it to land on! Your points are completely flawed in every area.

England vs Exiles isn't ideal, but it gives us a COMPETITIVE game against COMPETITIVE opposition and allows the England side to play together mid-season. Playing other nations didn't, and splitting off into two areas representing a tiny fraction of the country is not progression!
Posted Image

#30 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,610 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 05:49 AM

The Exiles concept is fatally flawed, the player quality coming over from Down Under is no longer sufficient to offer a suitable test for the England team and it's only going to get worse.

Really? The quality of the Exiles team (that hasn't lost a series) has suddenly just changed over night?!
Until England have won a series, I don't think anyone can use any such argument!

I'd very much support a Roses clash if it were done properly with the authorities imposing strict sanctions on clubs or players not playing ball.

Lancashire (old boundries) + 2 guest players from the South
Vs
Yorkshire + 2 guest players from further North

So not really Yorkshire vs Lancashire then is it?

Edited by Wellsy4HullFC, 30 March 2013 - 05:49 AM.

Posted Image

#31 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,610 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 06:01 AM

What about players outside of NSW and QLD in Australia? The game is played outside those areas, the world club champions are from Victoria!

And how many of that club are FROM Victoria?
One - Mahe Fonua.

How many NRL players fall outside of the NSW/QLD territory? Other than Kiwis/Islanders (which should itself be an Origin game!), you probably would struggle to name a 17 man side!
Posted Image

#32 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,901 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 07:31 AM

I'm sorry Yorkshire but no one other than yourselves cares about the county they are from. People move areas so often that they bear little allegiance to their original area, maybe the town holds some resonance but not the county.


It's 600 miles from Brisbane to Sydney, these states are like countries.

Lancashire is now broken up somewhat boundary wise and the whole game shares one motorway as you say people drive across to work and live.

It didn't work with lads like Barry Mac and Deacon from Lancashire but fully adopted Yorkies etc etc.

The argument about not giving it a chance is amazing, I grew up with Yorkshire and Lancashire every year for years. County RL played out for 80 years for gawds sake before it fizzled out in the modern world.

1981 Yorkshire.v.Lancashire at Castleford attendance 1,200.

We went to the exiles match at Headingley it was deadly with no passion in the crowd, didn't the only bit of passion end up with fans booing Sam? We don't want to do that again thanks so the assumption crowds will build may be wrong, the may go embarasingly into reverse.

What they haven't tried is "probables".v."possibles" but I'm not advocating that either. What I don't know here is in SOO if a prop outmuscles a current Kangaroo prop, or a centre bamboozles a current Kangaroo centre does that count towards selectors considering changes?

If you want a players answer to international preparedness Jamie Peacock has one!

Edited by The Parksider, 30 March 2013 - 08:10 AM.


#33 Phil

Phil
  • Coach
  • 1,879 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 08:40 AM

The thing is they wouldn't "slug it out" Attempts to create a state of origin style "war" are doomed to failure because, apart from banter, Yorkshire and Lancashire really don't hate each other whereas there is genuine antipathy between Qld and NSW.

The last Yorks v Lancs series was remarkable for its lack of intensity and ill feeling.

Not the way forward imo
"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

#34 roughyedspud

roughyedspud
  • Coach
  • 3,555 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 08:41 AM

the exiles should be binned in favour of the "celtic tigers" made up of welsh,scots and irish internationals..

OLDHAM RLFC
the 8TH most successful team in british RL


#35 Bedford Roughyed

Bedford Roughyed
  • Moderator
  • 5,126 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 09:18 AM

The problem is that as things stand the Super League, squirrelled away on Sky TV, fails to attract the interest of those outside the sport and makes little impression on the general sporting public. To achieve that recognition and media profile something else needs to be offered. Competitive representative games that actually mean something and have the ability of appealing to non-rugby league supporters.


Yes the way to get the national press on board and to get over the old hackneyed stereotypes is to stage matches between Yorkshire and Lancs... which failed to even attract interest within the sport the last time we tried it...
With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

#36 roughyedspud

roughyedspud
  • Coach
  • 3,555 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 09:44 AM

STUPID IDEA How about having 2/3 more french teams in SL making France better and playing them 2 times:)))CM


thats a even worse idea.....theres not the talent in france to achieve that yet

OLDHAM RLFC
the 8TH most successful team in british RL


#37 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,680 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 10:03 AM

Was it really given a chance last time? How long did it last for? 2 years??


Wait are you talking about the Exiles or Roses clashes?

They were dropped so quickly because they were rubbish, they really were. Passionless and players not giving their all resulting in largely one sided fixtures.

They were also artificial, old boundaries are useless. I'm from Widnes and I have zero, repeat zero affiliation to Lancashire. It's been 40 years since we were last in Lancashire.

#38 roughyedspud

roughyedspud
  • Coach
  • 3,555 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 10:07 AM

which is why we should have england v wales,scotland & ireland (the celtic tigers)

OLDHAM RLFC
the 8TH most successful team in british RL


#39 Duff Duff

Duff Duff
  • Banned
  • 717 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 10:47 AM

Ha ha. It certainly has inspired a reaction.

Apart from when England play against Australia or New Zealand the international game is a joke. England v anyone else in Europe is an uncompetitive joke. The lack of intensity in the Exiles games isn't the way forward either.

If British Rugby League can't escape from its petty club rivalries then it is doomed to mediocrity and a low media profile.

#40 nec

nec
  • Coach
  • 2,294 posts

Posted 30 March 2013 - 10:49 AM

which is why we should have england v wales,scotland & ireland (the celtic tigers)

This is a better idea, but I would go one further and have regular matches between England and other northern hemisphere sides. Proper internationals, between sides that compete in the world cup, don't give up if they don't bring competitive games immediately. By all means have a 2 match series v the Celtic Tigers as well though. That might make the earlier scotland, Wales & Ireland matches more meaningful. Exiles and roses are both dead concepts, play proper internationals.
Rugby League is a sport that desperately needs to expand its geographical supporter base and its player base. This imperative means that all other requirements are secondary until this is done.

All power in the game should be with governing bodies, especially international governing bodies.

Without these actions we will remain a minor sport internationally and nationally.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users