Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 402

Try our Fantastic 5-Issue Bundle Offer! For just £18, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:
The Play-offs Issue - pictured (out 12 Sept) – Covering the climax of the Super League & Championship seasons
The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final excitement from both sides of the world plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Selection Controversy threatens to turn World Cup into a Farce


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 CQItalia

CQItalia
  • Coach
  • 430 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 01:18 AM

http://www.rugbyleag...orld-cup-farce/

interesting thoughts!

I was aware euro both members and non members were told not to help the Italian rebels, but not the loss of funding or recognition if they did. Rebels wanted to play one NON MEMBER (both home and away) even willing to fund accommodation and bus from the nearest airport in Italy and it was on the cards, but stopped. I can see why for that nation though.

Heard recently some nations in Europe aren't happy, while on top of that rugby league is dieing or almost dead in places.



#2 petero

petero
  • Coach
  • 2,833 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 10:03 AM

After your conundrum of a post I would only strive to make one point: if as you seem to imply that R/L is the one source of this bed hopping syndrome, that reveals multiple choice selections of their Nationality as a convenience for individuals, who in most cases are simply not good enough to be selected for the Nation they would wish to be representing, well you need to THINK again.

Try RU the instigators of all this within the oval ball codes!

Football which has belied true Nationality for at least 50years!

Cricket, also never seen any obstacle that could not be overcome, regarding parentage etc!

Finally R/L is expanding albeit slowly and it is Bigger that even football in Oz and taking giant strides in NZ as well. So all in all, not really doing too bad considering it is as you say 'dead in the water' what?

#3 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,704 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 10:39 AM

I couldn't make sense of the original post either but the article was nothing new. Any large international RL tournament is bound to be full of mercenaries and there are far too many in a 14 team tournament. If you look deeply into all but 3/4 of the teams it is essentially a heritage world cup. I would suggest that a majority of players in the tournament were not born in the country which they are representing.

I suspect that once that tournament comes into the public eye more we'll be massacred in the press for it as we were in 2000.

It's hardly new news but I must admit it is extremely disappointing and leaves a sour taste that committed players who put in the effort to qualify have been overlooked for players that weren't bothered until the tournament came about.

#4 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,704 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 10:44 AM

After your conundrum of a post I would only strive to make one point: if as you seem to imply that R/L is the one source of this bed hopping syndrome, that reveals multiple choice selections of their Nationality as a convenience for individuals, who in most cases are simply not good enough to be selected for the Nation they would wish to be representing, well you need to THINK again.

Try RU the instigators of all this within the oval ball codes!

Football which has belied true Nationality for at least 50years!

Cricket, also never seen any obstacle that could not be overcome, regarding parentage etc!

Finally R/L is expanding albeit slowly and it is Bigger that even football in Oz and taking giant strides in NZ as well. So all in all, not really doing too bad considering it is as you say 'dead in the water' what?


Firstly, I doubt there are many nations that have qualified for the World Cup and then swapped huge swathes of their squad.

Also, I've never subscribed to the idea that if a team includes 1 or 2 heritage players then it is equivalent to using 5/6 or a whole squad of them.

#5 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,458 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 12:08 PM

I would imagine all sports have heritage players as well as those who are playing as a result of residency (look at the recently successful England cricket team which at one time had three born and bred South Africans in it I believe).  Wales will actually have some native Welsh players in it this year, which is progress on 2008, and I think Liam Finn is actually Irish and he is playing for Ireland!  All the pacific island nations are largely made up of pacific islanders, Kiwis with New Zealanders and Australia with Australians (and a few pacific islanders/Kiwis thrown in for good measure no doubt).  If you have a mother or father that is Scottish, for example, but you have been born and/or brought up in Australia then you can justifiably be called Scottish as much as Australian just as an Asian person having been brought up in this country often identify as Asian and British.  Therefore, I don't see why anyone would make a big fuss of there being heritage players in some representative teams.  And the world has changed in this area somewhat since 2000.  That was 13 years ago, which is quite a while ago now!



#6 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,704 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 12:18 PM

I would imagine all sports have heritage players as well as those who are playing as a result of residency (look at the recently successful England cricket team which at one time had three born and bred South Africans in it I believe).  Wales will actually have some native Welsh players in it this year, which is progress on 2008, and I think Liam Finn is actually Irish and he is playing for Ireland!  All the pacific island nations are largely made up of pacific islanders, Kiwis with New Zealanders and Australia with Australians (and a few pacific islanders/Kiwis thrown in for good measure no doubt).  If you have a mother or father that is Scottish, for example, but you have been born and/or brought up in Australia then you can justifiably be called Scottish as much as Australian just as an Asian person having been brought up in this country often identify as Asian and British.  Therefore, I don't see why anyone would make a big fuss of there being heritage players in some representative teams.  And the world has changed in this area somewhat since 2000.  That was 13 years ago, which is quite a while ago now!


There are two problems. Heritage players should be used to bolster strong squads, not create them. Being proud of your heritage and wanting to represent that is fine but if you are just settling because you can't get picked for England, Australia or NZ then it is not the same.

We also have the fact that a large number of non-heritage players that successfully got those countries to the world cup have just been replaced by big occasion mercenaries.

#7 chuffer

chuffer
  • Coach
  • 3,542 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 12:22 PM

Ooh I do love a good farce...

#8 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,752 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 12:50 PM

There are two rival bodies in Italy - is that not what the OP was about ?


"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#9 Pie tries

Pie tries
  • Coach
  • 462 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 12:50 PM

Don't like the title, get on side

#10 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 19,969 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 12:56 PM

I couldn't make sense of the original post either but the article was nothing new. Any large international RL tournament is bound to be full of mercenaries and there are far too many in a 14 team tournament. If you look deeply into all but 3/4 of the teams it is essentially a heritage world cup. I would suggest that a majority of players in the tournament were not born in the country which they are representing.

I suspect that once that tournament comes into the public eye more we'll be massacred in the press for it as we were in 2000.

It's hardly new news but I must admit it is extremely disappointing and leaves a sour taste that committed players who put in the effort to qualify have been overlooked for players that weren't bothered until the tournament came about.

I don;t accept for a minute that it is reasonable that we get stick for heritage players. Not when cricket has South Africans and god knows who else representing England..ditto RU etc. Yes, they may have tightened up now, but don't we get the same luxury?

 

Apart from the USA case, which frankly is a disgrace and deserves ridiculing.


No I don't care if you're if you're into different bands

No cause for so much hatred, I'm just a different man

Pull off that cover, I will too, and learn to understand

With music deep inside we'll make world unity our plan

 

7 Seconds -Walk Together, Rock Together


#11 Ullman

Ullman
  • Coach
  • 7,450 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 01:08 PM

Ooh I do love a good farce...

It wouldn't be rugby league without the 'F' word.


"I own up. I am a serial risk taker. I live in a flood zone, cycle without a helmet, drink alcohol and on Sunday I had bacon for breakfast."


#12 jannerboyuk

jannerboyuk
  • Coach
  • 4,888 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 01:58 PM

So 'legitimate' sides:
Australia
New Zealand
England
France
Png
Cook Islands?
Fiji?
Samoa?
Tonga?
Wales?

Defo not:
Scotland
Ireland
Yanks
Italy

Let me be clear personally I think guys whose heritage involves having moved when a young kid with family going back centuries are legitimate whatever the temptations of oz and the kiwis given the vast economic disparity between those two countries and everywhere else in the pacific region I will not accept that guys who have just tried to make some decent money before turning out for Fiji, Samoa and Tonga are not 'legitimate'. Good luck to them. Everything else is about genuine progress so the real question is how do we compare to 2008?
PROUD TO BE A MEMBER OF http://www.rugbyleaguecares.org/ and http://www.walesrugb...-wales-for-2013
Predictions for the future -
Crusaders RL to get a franchise for 2012 onwards -WRONG
Widnes Vikings also to get a franchise - RIGHT
Crusaders RL to do the double over Widnes and finish five places ahead of them -WRONG
Widnes Vikings NOT to dominate rugby league in years to come! STILL TO COME

http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/cardiffdemonsrlfc/
http://www.walesrugbyleague.co.uk/

I promise to pay �10 to the charity of Bomb Jacks choice if Widnes Millionaires finish above the battling underdogs Crusaders RL. I OWE A TENNER!
http://www.jaxaxe.co...89/Default.aspx

#13 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,704 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 02:27 PM

So 'legitimate' sides:
Australia
New Zealand
England
France
Png
Cook Islands?
Fiji?
Samoa?
Tonga?
Wales?

Defo not:
Scotland
Ireland
Yanks
Italy

Let me be clear personally I think guys whose heritage involves having moved when a young kid with family going back centuries are legitimate whatever the temptations of oz and the kiwis given the vast economic disparity between those two countries and everywhere else in the pacific region I will not accept that guys who have just tried to make some decent money before turning out for Fiji, Samoa and Tonga are not 'legitimate'. Good luck to them. Everything else is about genuine progress so the real question is how do we compare to 2008?

I don;t accept for a minute that it is reasonable that we get stick for heritage players. Not when cricket has South Africans and god knows who else representing England..ditto RU etc. Yes, they may have tightened up now, but don't we get the same luxury?
 
Apart from the USA case, which frankly is a disgrace and deserves ridiculing.


We do get stick and we deserve to in my opinion. I'm not talking about Rangi Chase or any of the English examples either.

There is a difference between strengthening a squad in a country that genuinely plays the sport and using it to effectively create a squad from scratch. We do far to much of the latter in rugby league and it brings ridicule on the sport and the tournament to include these sides. In many of our examples they would struggle to put out a squad to compete with Halton Hornets without heritage players never mind an international side. Could the same difference be said of any RU or cricket nation?

I agree with the final poster, I don't mean players that left when they were young or have a strong identity with say both sets of Samoan parents. I mean players that would have played for Australia, NZ or England in a heartbeat before the nation that they are actually playing for.

I also doubt that many other sports allow their nations to flip-flop nationalities as much as ours does.

Edited by Maximus Decimus, 05 October 2013 - 02:28 PM.


#14 Cookie

Cookie
  • Coach
  • 171 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 02:58 PM

Difficult one this! Every country wants to field as strong a team as possible even if this means using NRL/Super League players at the expense of indigenous players from the countries involved. The only way this will change is ever RL gets to the point where there are proper qualifying rounds for a World Cup and only those players who have played in x number of these matches is eligible to play for that country in the Cup. This causes problems in its own right - what about newly emerging players who might not have had the opportunity to play for their country or perhaps were injured during the qualifying events? As it is, RL is not yet strong enough to go down this route.

The eligibility question itself is also a difficult one For example, my son can legitimately play for England (born and raised here), New Zealand (has Citizenship) or the Cook Islands (through me). Altho' we live here, I have raised my children to also think of themselves as being culturally part of NZ and the Cook Islands and wouldn't regard him as being a "mercenary" if he chose to play for any of the teams he is eligible for and would be rightly proud to wear any of the shirts. I'm not sure how you could come up with some rules/regulations that could take this into account.

#15 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 19,969 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 03:12 PM

We do get stick and we deserve to in my opinion. I'm not talking about Rangi Chase or any of the English examples either.

There is a difference between strengthening a squad in a country that genuinely plays the sport and using it to effectively create a squad from scratch. We do far to much of the latter in rugby league and it brings ridicule on the sport and the tournament to include these sides. In many of our examples they would struggle to put out a squad to compete with Halton Hornets without heritage players never mind an international side. Could the same difference be said of any RU or cricket nation?

I agree with the final poster, I don't mean players that left when they were young or have a strong identity with say both sets of Samoan parents. I mean players that would have played for Australia, NZ or England in a heartbeat before the nation that they are actually playing for.

I also doubt that many other sports allow their nations to flip-flop nationalities as much as ours does.

I don't disagree with you really. But IMO it's a case of ends justifying the means.

No I don't care if you're if you're into different bands

No cause for so much hatred, I'm just a different man

Pull off that cover, I will too, and learn to understand

With music deep inside we'll make world unity our plan

 

7 Seconds -Walk Together, Rock Together


#16 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,704 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 03:25 PM

Difficult one this! Every country wants to field as strong a team as possible even if this means using NRL/Super League players at the expense of indigenous players from the countries involved. The only way this will change is ever RL gets to the point where there are proper qualifying rounds for a World Cup and only those players who have played in x number of these matches is eligible to play for that country in the Cup. This causes problems in its own right - what about newly emerging players who might not have had the opportunity to play for their country or perhaps were injured during the qualifying events? As it is, RL is not yet strong enough to go down this route.

The eligibility question itself is also a difficult one For example, my son can legitimately play for England (born and raised here), New Zealand (has Citizenship) or the Cook Islands (through me). Altho' we live here, I have raised my children to also think of themselves as being culturally part of NZ and the Cook Islands and wouldn't regard him as being a "mercenary" if he chose to play for any of the teams he is eligible for and would be rightly proud to wear any of the shirts. I'm not sure how you could come up with some rules/regulations that could take this into account.


This is of course the difficulty. The rules were probably created for situations like your own or for situations where somebody moved when they were younger and felt a part of that nation. However, the rules are abused across many sports and have been abused greatly in RL. I doubt the rules were brought in to allow countries to strengthen their squads through technicalities a la Rangi Chase.

My own child will be born and bred English but will have an Irish mother. If he/she feels an affiliation to their Irish heritage to the extent that they wanted to play sport under the banner of Ireland then I won't have a problem with that. Nationality is not a hard and fast rule.

What I suspect happens in RL (and to a lesser extent other sports) is that people are brought up English, support England in a variety of sports and dream of playing for England RL. However, when they realise they are not good enough they opt to play for Ireland/Scotland because they have a grandparent from there. This could have been me had I been a semi-decent RL player. If this happens a couple of times it is bearable but it becomes a problem when these make up large portions of the squads and in some cases almost the whole squad.

We have in some respects grown numb to this over the years, especially since 2000 but it has reared it's ugly head again with the recent squad selections. In 2000 they were picked out of absolute necessity (which itself should have prevented their inclusion) but this time they have been picked over home-grown players and dedicated heritage players who have played through the qualifying tournaments and other games. It was easier to stomach and justify knowing that the heritage players had put the hard yards in and had in many ways proved their loyalty.

In every respect these World-Cup-only heritage players are mercenaries and are bringing the tournament into disrepute.

#17 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,704 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 03:27 PM

I don't disagree with you really. But IMO it's a case of ends justifying the means.


I understand the necessity but if we are to learn the lessons of 2000 then we need the tournament to have a degree of credibility. I think we had built some up with the 2008 tournament and subsequent qualifying tournaments involving these countries. They aren't completely new like in 2000.

However, I think the drafting in of mercenaries just for the tournament undoes a lot of that good work and is just plain wrong IMO.

#18 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 19,969 posts

Posted 05 October 2013 - 03:31 PM

I understand the necessity but if we are to learn the lessons of 2000 then we need the tournament to have a degree of credibility. I think we had built some up with the 2008 tournament and subsequent qualifying tournaments involving these countries. They aren't completely new like in 2000.

However, I think the drafting in of mercenaries just for the tournament undoes a lot of that good work and is just plain wrong IMO.

Totally agree. I just don't think it is totally fair to highlight RL when others have been guilty. That's not to say 'don't criticise' because it is worthy of criticism.


No I don't care if you're if you're into different bands

No cause for so much hatred, I'm just a different man

Pull off that cover, I will too, and learn to understand

With music deep inside we'll make world unity our plan

 

7 Seconds -Walk Together, Rock Together


#19 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,776 posts

Posted 06 October 2013 - 08:18 AM

Difficult one this! Every country wants to field as strong a team as possible even if this means using NRL/Super League players at the expense of indigenous players from the countries involved. The only way this will change is ever RL gets to the point where there are proper qualifying rounds for a World Cup and only those players who have played in x number of these matches is eligible to play for that country in the Cup. This causes problems in its own right - what about newly emerging players who might not have had the opportunity to play for their country or perhaps were injured during the qualifying events? As it is, RL is not yet strong enough to go down this route.

Maybe they could include U16s/U18s, A team games, etc. as representing that nation, so anyone emerging has made themselves available?

The main issue people have is that these players are available but choose not to represent their nation at all. If you're in contention for the national side, chances are you'll have come through the national selection squads at some point.

To pick a side of bandwagoners is a slap in the face to those that have battled to get into the side legitimately.

The eligibility question itself is also a difficult one For example, my son can legitimately play for England (born and raised here), New Zealand (has Citizenship) or the Cook Islands (through me). Altho' we live here, I have raised my children to also think of themselves as being culturally part of NZ and the Cook Islands and wouldn't regard him as being a "mercenary" if he chose to play for any of the teams he is eligible for and would be rightly proud to wear any of the shirts. I'm not sure how you could come up with some rules/regulations that could take this into account.

I have no personal issues with a player wanting to play for their nation of heritage. They have that right. I just think that they need to pay their dues the same as everyone else and show commitment to that nation. These USA players have not done that.

Saying that, the RLIF need to have a structures international programme for that to happen. Internationals on certain weekends so players can be available. That won't happen.
Posted Image

#20 CQItalia

CQItalia
  • Coach
  • 430 posts

Posted 06 October 2013 - 11:16 AM

http://www.rugbyleag...r-globalisation


Edited by CQItalia, 06 October 2013 - 11:18 AM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users