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
- - - - -

The Lions will Roar again

Happy day!

  • Please log in to reply
56 replies to this topic

#21 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,680 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 03:46 PM

Isn't the idea for GB RL to tour once every four years? I don't think the intention is to replace the England team.

That's what I said when I said about the tours. I suspect they are trying to copy the Union model.

Despite that being the original intention I think, it will have been something like 8 years since the GB team was used. My own preference is for a return to the GB squad for all major tournaments.

#22 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,488 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 03:47 PM

there won't be any welsh,scots or irish that displaces a englishmen for a GB spot

 

There shouldn't be, unless there's a bit of tokenism involved, but it might be that a few players might have dual nationality. There was the idea that some players who qualify for England may be persuaded to opt for their other nation if GB was resurrected, but I'm not sure. England are still going to be playing when it matters - in the 4 nations and world cups - so wouldn't any ambitious and talented English player opt for them in order to play in games against top opposition?


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

#23 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,488 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 03:49 PM

That's what I said when I said about the tours. I suspect they are trying to copy the Union model.

Despite that being the original intention I think, it will have been something like 8 years since the GB team was used. My own preference is for a return to the GB squad for all major tournaments.

 

And scrap England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland? That would be a backward step.


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

#24 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,488 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 03:54 PM

Who knows with those tarts... :D

 

Well, that's right.  :D 

The Sporting Life link (press release - also in Scotland's Daily Record and in Daily Mail) quotes Nigel Wood and states that he wants to discuss it at next week's RLIF meeting. It doesn't mention whether the ARL have any different ideas (like, as you say, a rest year). Surely the Aussies are not going to wait five weeks (say, one warm-up week, a game v PNG, then a three match series against the Kiwis) before they play GB?


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

#25 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,680 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 03:57 PM

And scrap England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland? That would be a backward step.

I disagree, the gap between England and those nations is so considerable that any benefits to those nations are outweighed by the damage in taking away the tradition of GBRL.

I completely understand the reasons for it, I just think it was too idealistic and has massive flaws. Even in the best circumstances we're talking about a process that would only see real benefits in 20/30/40 years time and may in reality never see any benefits. On the flip-side I think we'd see a situation where the likes of Iestyn Harris, Keiron Cunningham and Lee Briers would never opt to play for Wales now if it meant never genuinely competing in a top-level international game.

At the current time, when the Celtic nations have literally hundreds of players and play in front of hundreds of people, their best players should be able to play for GB as well as their own nation but in different tournaments. Look at the Evans brothers, they are proper Welsh but have opted to play for England to play in the big games.

#26 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,602 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 05:26 PM

I really hope they bring it back. Splitting into the home nations hasn't shown signs of making the benefits that they would want.

Can't say I agree.
Four home nations sides instead of one, meaning more international games.

France pulling in crowds over 10k against home nations sides.
Wales qualifying for the 4N.

Have England really not achieved the same as GB did or would have?

I really can't agree with the Bring Back GB line people continue to repeat.
Posted Image

#27 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 3,886 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 05:43 PM

GB side should only be brought back when their is other home nations players good enough to compete. We need to keep developing Wales, Ireland and Scotland. The Welsh preparation for the WC is coming across as great and also their is Welsh talent breaking into SL which is good.

I think we should aim for a five yearly international schedule:

Year 1: An under 21s world cup/ few England non competitive games.

Year 2: 6 nations between the best 6 sides in the world (hopefully Aus/Kiwis will stop stealing Fiji players ect)

Year 3: GB test of Aus/Kiwis

Year 4 a European tournament england France Wales

Year 5 the world cup.

Just a thought but at least a schedule like this will give fans something to prepare for.

#28 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,680 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 06:54 PM

Can't say I agree.
Four home nations sides instead of one, meaning more international games.

France pulling in crowds over 10k against home nations sides.
Wales qualifying for the 4N.

Have England really not achieved the same as GB did or would have?

I really can't agree with the Bring Back GB line people continue to repeat.

The profile of internationals is lower and playing as GB was something relatively unique to Rugby League. On the playing front little has changed, we haven't beaten Australia since we switched to England but I'm not going to suggest that we would have.

There have been very few benefits internationally to what we had previously. People make the mistake of thinking that the home nations didn't play before we split from GB. They did and they got similar crowds to what they do now, playing in games of a similar profile. We used to have a home nations tournament with a similar profile running alongside the Great Britain side.

My main argument is tradition and the playing side of things. Like I said earlier, in the 90's some of the biggest British names played for Wales whilst at the same time playing for GB. I doubt they would have decided to play for Wales today, making their side even weaker. It's already started but ironically with genuinely Welsh players deciding to opt for England. Is it really strengthening those countries to take out players like this and resign them to the small player pools and really second rate English heritage players?

Edited by Maximus Decimus, 11 April 2013 - 06:55 PM.


#29 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,488 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 07:16 PM

GB side should only be brought back when their is other home nations players good enough to compete. We need to keep developing Wales, Ireland and Scotland. The Welsh preparation for the WC is coming across as great and also their is Welsh talent breaking into SL which is good.

I think we should aim for a five yearly international schedule:

Year 1: An under 21s world cup/ few England non competitive games.

Year 2: 6 nations between the best 6 sides in the world (hopefully Aus/Kiwis will stop stealing Fiji players ect)

Year 3: GB test of Aus/Kiwis

Year 4 a European tournament england France Wales

Year 5 the world cup.

Just a thought but at least a schedule like this will give fans something to prepare for.

 Yes, but the game is now establishing a four year cycle, based upon world cups in 2013, 2017, etc.


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

#30 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,488 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 07:56 PM

1. I disagree, the gap between England and those nations is so considerable that any benefits to those nations are outweighed by the damage in taking away the tradition of GBRL.

2. I completely understand the reasons for it, I just think it was too idealistic and has massive flaws. Even in the best circumstances we're talking about a process that would only see real benefits in 20/30/40 years time and may in reality never see any benefits. On the flip-side I think we'd see a situation where the likes of Iestyn Harris, Keiron Cunningham and Lee Briers would never opt to play for Wales now if it meant never genuinely competing in a top-level international game.

3. At the current time, when the Celtic nations have literally hundreds of players and play in front of hundreds of people, their best players should be able to play for GB as well as their own nation but in different tournaments. Look at the Evans brothers, they are proper Welsh but have opted to play for England to play in the big games.

 

1. The benefit to those nations is that they exist. The gap between them and England is irrelevant. England (hence GB) are so far behind Australia, and have been for three decades now; should we do away with England/GB? And any damage that has been done by taking away the (relatively recent) tradition of GB is an issue that English rugby league has to face up to. Which other major team sport in England would want to subsume their national identity - and their national team - into a shared representative team?

 

2. Having national sides for nations that play the game is idealistic? No, it's just the normal way of the world in team sports. Of course it may be 20/30/40 years before we see the benefits of current developments, but here's the thing: to realise the benefits of a process that takes 20/30/40 years, you have to persevere with it now! As for Welsh players opting for other nation's teams, that is an issue for the game's authorities and the individuals concerned. It is up to the game to provide regular access for second-tier nations such as Wales to the big three, whether in world cups or through qualifying for the 4 Nations. Under your suggestion, Wales, Scotland and Ireland would never get to play the big teams, presumably having to be content with a never ending cycle of games between themselves.

 

3. The Celtic nations may be small at this time but don't think that nothing is going on. I am literally bombarded with messages about the development activities going on in the Scottish game, whether that be school games, development squads at various age levels, student trials and 9s tournaments, wheelchair RL, coaching and official courses. The game in Wales is even more advanced, and I'm sure the Irish are getting stuck in as well. Yet you think it would be a good idea for the three teams never to play in a world cup again? And never have access to a 4 Nations? And what other tournaments? A Celtic Tri Nations?


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

#31 South Wakefield Sharks

South Wakefield Sharks
  • Coach
  • 2,172 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 08:18 PM

All 4 home nations have a greater profile and play in front of bigger crowds than at any time for any of them or GB since the end of the Super League war.

Stick with it, the home nations have meaningful, regular matches now and there is a pathway for players in those countries.

GB playing every 4 years or so, on top of the regular matches for the home nations is the way forward.

#32 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,488 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 08:29 PM

1. The profile of internationals is lower and playing as GB was something relatively unique to Rugby League. On the playing front little has changed, we haven't beaten Australia since we switched to England but I'm not going to suggest that we would have.

2. There have been very few benefits internationally to what we had previously. People make the mistake of thinking that the home nations didn't play before we split from GB. They did and they got similar crowds to what they do now, playing in games of a similar profile. We used to have a home nations tournament with a similar profile running alongside the Great Britain side.

3. My main argument is tradition and the playing side of things. Like I said earlier, in the 90's some of the biggest British names played for Wales whilst at the same time playing for GB. I doubt they would have decided to play for Wales today, making their side even weaker. It's already started but ironically with genuinely Welsh players deciding to opt for England. Is it really strengthening those countries to take out players like this and resign them to the small player pools and really second rate English heritage players?

 

1. Playing as GB was unique in major team sports because it was a sign of rugby league's failure to develop the game throughout Great Britain and Ireland. The game's 'national' team became Great Britain (or Great Britain and Ireland, occasionally) in order to utilise the rugby union converts from Scotland and Wales, not out of any great enthusiasm for the Union. We may as well revert to having a national side called the 'Northern Union'. And, again, if a side made up of English players cannot play as well playing as England as they would being called Great Britain, then that is an issue for English rugby league to sort out. It is not a reason for rolling back the little progress the game has made in the other nations.

 

2. The problem was that England very rarely got any game time outside of world cups, quite an issue for England's coaches trying to build for the game's premier international competition. It also caused the other three nations to lose their best players if they were called upon to help out GB.

3. Genuine Welsh players should not be allowed to play for England, full stop (unless they are dual qualified). That is something, again, for the game's authorities - and the players - to deal with. And, as for tradition, the major representative side from these islands was England before the war, so the current situation is traditional. It's just that now the game is laying down new traditions in the three other nations.

I can appreciate that the game, like the rest of society, is going through some rough times at present. Major sponsorship problems, top level expansion that has failed/is failing, an apparent cooling towards the game by the major broadcasting partner, and a definite lack of vision in the wake of Richard Lewis' departure, but this is not a time for the game to be withdrawing back into its regional comfort zone.

A Great Britain (with or without Ireland/Northern Ireland) tour down-under once every four years is one thing, but there should not be composite sides in the game's major tournaments. England are big enough to stand on their own!


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

#33 Leeds Wire

Leeds Wire
  • Coach
  • 3,831 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 08:30 PM

If there is another thread on this, sorry to have missed it. I was delighted to read that there may be a Lions Tour Down Under in 2015. With a full GB side, so there could be a couple of Welsh forwards in there, all being well.

Assuming that a number of good quality NRLers play for the Home Nations in the WC, would/should they then be available for the Lions?

If this is true, I'd be absolutely chuffed. We all shouted for team GB at the Olympics and it would be great to do that for our rugby team.  My kids got into the team GB thing and they've asked me why RL doesn't have a team. I'd love to tell them that they actually do.



#34 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,488 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 08:46 PM

If this is true, I'd be absolutely chuffed. We all shouted for team GB at the Olympics and it would be great to do that for our rugby team.  My kids got into the team GB thing and they've asked me why RL doesn't have a team. I'd love to tell them that they actually do.

 

Do your kids ask you why soccer and cricket don't have a Great Britain team? 


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

#35 Leeds Wire

Leeds Wire
  • Coach
  • 3,831 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 09:09 PM

Do your kids ask you why soccer and cricket don't have a Great Britain team? 

Yes, they have asked about a GB cricket team (I don't follow soccer). I don't have a satisfactory answer for them but its a very good question, especially as Welsh, Irish and Scotsmen have all recently represented England.  :)

 

I just think rugby is in a very different place to soccer and cricket and we should pool our resources to produce a stronger and more united "brand" that brings the rugby league family together. I might be wrong and I understand the arguments but I think a GB rugby team would be a much more attractive concept to sell to the public. 

 

I hate to say it but it works in union - separate home nations but a united front against the best in the world on tour.



#36 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 3,886 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 09:24 PM

Yes, they have asked about a GB cricket team (I don't follow soccer). I don't have a satisfactory answer for them but its a very good question, especially as Welsh, Irish and Scotsmen have all recently represented England. :)

I just think rugby is in a very different place to soccer and cricket and we should pool our resources to produce a stronger and more united "brand" that brings the rugby league family together. I might be wrong and I understand the arguments but I think a GB rugby team would be a much more attractive concept to sell to the public.

I hate to say it but it works in union - separate home nations but a united front against the best in the world on tour.


But in Union all four home nations are fairly strong and all nations are represented but in soccer, cricket and RL this isn't the case. In Soccer only bale would play in GB side all the rest English. In cricket there wouldn't be any nationalities except English and South Africans. It would be similar in RL, they wouldn't be GB it would be England in a different name and Wales will release this and not support them. It would demolish the Welsh identity as an RL international side and ruin the progress we have made in the country.

#37 roughyedspud

roughyedspud
  • Coach
  • 3,554 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 07:53 AM

like i said........theres not a single welsh,scots or irish player that'll displace a englishman in ANY Great britain team



dudson? flower?.........give ya heads a wobble!! who are they up against? burgess x4...james graham,erol crabtree,chris hill...to name just EIGHT


danny brough can't even catch the england team...so as a scottish player he's got no chance what so ever!!


a couple of years ago there was a decent shout to have "irish" wingers pat richards & damian blanch in a GB team...now we have world class winger in ryan hall and charnley & briscoe just below world class....


every single GB player will be current england players......."token" players will lower the standard of the GB team

Edited by roughyedspud, 12 April 2013 - 07:54 AM.

OLDHAM RLFC
the 8TH most successful team in british RL


#38 sweaty craiq

sweaty craiq
  • Coach
  • 1,477 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 08:04 AM

It allows a Welsh RU player the incentive of a competitive RL international scene to factor into changing codes or choosing a code at 19.



#39 Scubby

Scubby
  • Coach
  • 3,676 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 08:17 AM

like i said........theres not a single welsh,scots or irish player that'll displace a englishman in ANY Great britain team



dudson? flower?.........give ya heads a wobble!! who are they up against? burgess x4...james graham,erol crabtree,chris hill...to name just EIGHT


danny brough can't even catch the england team...so as a scottish player he's got no chance what so ever!!


a couple of years ago there was a decent shout to have "irish" wingers pat richards & damian blanch in a GB team...now we have world class winger in ryan hall and charnley & briscoe just below world class....


every single GB player will be current england players......."token" players will lower the standard of the GB team

 

Where was Chris Hill two years ago? Two years is a long time. The 2015 GB team maybe all English. We can't predict what a 2019 team will look like if the incentive is there to declare for the other home nations.



#40 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,167 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 08:26 AM

Plenty of our GB teams have been all English - I don;t think that made them less credible.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users