Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

Six Game GB Tour planned for 2015

But Aussies wont sign off

  • Please log in to reply
128 replies to this topic

#21 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,366 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 03:43 PM

I think you're wrong geek. Up until the last second defeat in that WC semi against NZ, the atmosphere and 'Enger-land' chanting was noticeably stronger than anything I remember for GB. It was building very nicely but hey, let's go backwards and pretend.

#22 Futtocks

Futtocks
  • Coach
  • 21,582 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 03:54 PM

Non-RL but general sports fans (from Football especially) would, I think, find it asier to get behind the England brand more than a GB squad which will be overwhelmingly English.

 

One day, when Wales, Scotland and Ireland have enough top-class players (without accents from Down Under or the North of England), the Lions concept can be revived for occasional tours, as RU do, and really be something big. For a sport over a century old, that is where we ought to have been for a long time now.


Edited by Futtocks, 11 May 2014 - 03:55 PM.

A mind is like a parachute. It doesn’t work if it isn’t open. Frank Zappa (1940 - 1993)


#23 RugbyLeagueGeek

RugbyLeagueGeek
  • Coach
  • 699 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 05:49 PM

I think you're wrong geek. Up until the last second defeat in that WC semi against NZ, the atmosphere and 'Enger-land' chanting was noticeably stronger than anything I remember for GB. It was building very nicely but hey, let's go backwards and pretend.

The argument about England vs GB has been done to death on here. But any success and increased profile from the World Cup had nothing to do with the 'brand' - it was purely because it was the national team.



#24 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,366 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 07:22 PM

The argument about England vs GB has been done to death on here. But any success and increased profile from the World Cup had nothing to do with the 'brand' - it was purely because it was the national team.

I agree it has been done. But I think you are wrong on this. Plenty of people going to the WC games were newbies to whom GB meant little. Unless of course it was actually GB perhaps and not just England under a different name.

#25 nec

nec
  • Coach
  • 2,379 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 07:35 PM

The era we are pandering to won't attend if any aspect of the game or tournament or pricing or rules or squad is not to their liking. The concept belongs in the past. It is appalling that England are not playing France, Wales, a pacific nation before they leave these shores to build on the momentum. To muddy the future potential with the outdated GB tour is so retrograde as to be laughable. We have a huge new constituency that bought into England rl, we are abandoning them to pander to traditionalists who thrive on finding reasons to downplay the modern game. Astonishing and reprehensible!
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.

#26 RugbyLeagueGeek

RugbyLeagueGeek
  • Coach
  • 699 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 09:15 PM

Plenty of people going to the WC games were newbies to whom GB meant little.

What evidence have you got to back this up? Are you saying these people wouldn't have attended had it been GB as opposed to England? Did GB mean little to the same general public during the Olympics in the year before?



#27 RugbyLeagueGeek

RugbyLeagueGeek
  • Coach
  • 699 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 09:18 PM

The era we are pandering to won't attend if any aspect of the game or tournament or pricing or rules or squad is not to their liking. The concept belongs in the past.

As documented on this forum many times, there are sound arguments for reinstating GB, which have been reiterated by the likes of Jamie Peacock as recently as last week.

 

 

It is appalling that England are not playing France, Wales, a pacific nation before they leave these shores to build on the momentum. To muddy the future potential with the outdated GB tour is so retrograde as to be laughable. We have a huge new constituency that bought into England rl, we are abandoning them to pander to traditionalists who thrive on finding reasons to downplay the modern game. Astonishing and reprehensible!

I agree with this sentiment. The problem for me is not the reinstatement of GB, but the lack of any international programme for England. If England (and the other home nations) had an extensive international schedule, then a GB tour could compliment this. As things stand, it's all just a bit of a sorry mess.



#28 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,366 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 09:43 PM

What evidence have you got to back this up? Are you saying these people wouldn't have attended had it been GB as opposed to England? Did GB mean little to the same general public during the Olympics in the year before?

Ticket sales and the areas those people came from. Talking to people on the day.

People get behind GB in the Olympics because it is genuinely athletes from all over the UK, not just Yorkshire or Lancashire.

#29 Scubby

Scubby
  • Coach
  • 4,142 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 09:58 PM

Couldn't England tour and play Australia in the Ashes? It was England before GB.



#30 yipyee

yipyee
  • Coach
  • 1,355 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 09:58 PM

2015 should be on home soil...end of....

#31 RugbyLeagueGeek

RugbyLeagueGeek
  • Coach
  • 699 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 10:14 PM

Ticket sales and the areas those people came from. Talking to people on the day.

People get behind GB in the Olympics because it is genuinely athletes from all over the UK, not just Yorkshire or Lancashire.

 

I'm confused. People on the day genuinely said that had it been GB they wouldn't have attended?

 

I disagree with your second point also. I just cannot believe that the majority of the general public pick and choose whether to follow GB depending on which parts of the UK the athletes come from. People either have an interest in a sport or they don't. Nobody is going to sit down and say "I would've supported GB in the Rugby League today, but then I found out that the players all come from Yorkshire and Lancashire, so now I'm not going to bother."



#32 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,366 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 10:27 PM

The reason is that most people aren't stupid. If they see a team purporting to represent, say, Wales, and find none actually come from Wales then they regard it as bogus. Similarly they would be confused as to why 13 English players aren't just called England.

No, nobody said I wouldn't have come if it was GB. But I met several people who had never been to a RL game (as I did in 2011)

#33 Southern Tiger

Southern Tiger
  • Coach
  • 461 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 10:58 PM

I don't think whether it was GB or England is the issue, the fact is England RL is at least as important now as GB but to new fans of the game, continuation of a brand is vital, that brand is now England RL. This is the situation now and an opportunity to build internationally rather than ping ponging in the hope of achieving short term gains.

Edited by Southern Tiger, 11 May 2014 - 11:00 PM.

If you don't like Rugby League, you don't like Rugby

Posted Image

#34 RugbyLeagueGeek

RugbyLeagueGeek
  • Coach
  • 699 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 11:13 PM

I don't think whether it was GB or England is the issue, the fact is England RL is at least as important now as GB but to new fans of the game, continuation of a brand is vital, that brand is now England RL.

I agree that the lack of continuity with England is a massive problem. For me this is the major problem rather than reinstating GB. GB Lions can coexist with England in the world of RU quite easily because the home nations all have extensive international schedules and can preserve their identity.



#35 RugbyLeagueGeek

RugbyLeagueGeek
  • Coach
  • 699 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 11:24 PM

The reason is that most people aren't stupid. If they see a team purporting to represent, say, Wales, and find none actually come from Wales then they regard it as bogus.

Of course they would, but this example is not relevant to this discussion. All of the players selected for GB will come from GB.

 

Similarly they would be confused as to why 13 English players aren't just called England.

Really? Did English people stop supporting Andy Murray in the Olympics because he was Scottish? Or the curling team because they were Scottish? I may be naive, but from my experience people aren't so xenophobic that they would refuse to support GB for this reason.

 

There is plenty of evidence to show that people will come out in numbers to support GB RL, just as there is evidence to show that they will come out to support England RL. The 'brand' has nothing to do with it, because the reality is that neither entity has a recognisable brand. The biggest problem is the lack of any structured long-term international calendar undermines any attempt to build a 'brand'.



#36 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,366 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 11:39 PM

Of course they would, but this example is not relevant to this discussion. All of the players selected for GB will come from GB.

 

Really? Did English people stop supporting Andy Murray in the Olympics because he was Scottish? Or the curling team because they were Scottish? I may be naive, but from my experience people aren't so xenophobic that they would refuse to support GB for this reason.

 

There is plenty of evidence to show that people will come out in numbers to support GB RL, just as there is evidence to show that they will come out to support England RL. The 'brand' has nothing to do with it, because the reality is that neither entity has a recognisable brand. The biggest problem is the lack of any structured long-term international calendar undermines any attempt to build a 'brand'.

Yes and chopping and changing names will do nothing to build any brand. And of course the players come from GB but for that matter they also come from Europe, so why not call it that?

 

Why would people not support a Scottish player under a GB tag? Unless he had a West Yorkshire accent, because he was from West Yorkshire maybe and they thought he wasn't actually Scottish. Had GB been selling out stadiums left right and centre, then we probably wouldn't even be having this argument now but the fact is they didn't and just because Garry Schofield and a few other RL luminaries wax lyrical about it, doesn't mean that it was something the entire country agree on. 

 

Regardless of that, call it what you like, the traditional moaners will find another reason not to attend games due to some other complaint.

 

Oh and plenty of English people wanted Murray to fail.


Edited by Johnoco, 11 May 2014 - 11:40 PM.


#37 roughyedspud

roughyedspud
  • Coach
  • 4,045 posts

Posted 12 May 2014 - 02:19 AM

have england play australia for the ashes


and have the "celtic tigers" play png,fiji & NZ


SIMPLE

OLDHAM RLFC
the 8TH most successful team in british RL


#38 RugbyLeagueGeek

RugbyLeagueGeek
  • Coach
  • 699 posts

Posted 12 May 2014 - 08:38 AM

Yes and chopping and changing names will do nothing to build any brand. And of course the players come from GB but for that matter they also come from Europe, so why not call it that?

Because of residency and grandparent rules. Any Scots, Irish and Welsh players making a living from pro RL will most likely be playing for a club in England, and so therefore have the option to align themselves to the England team in order to maximise their international careers. I would also imagine (but am guessing here) that there is a higher proportion of Scots, Irish and Welsh who have an English parent or grandparent and qualify for England through this route (e.g. Rhys Evans). This in turn weakens the other home nations and hinders their development. Jamie Peacock reiterated this point just last week. The majority of French pro RL players will be making a living playing in France, and therefore they will not be eligible to play for England. So calling it Europe would not be necessary. This is a real issue, whether you choose to acknowledge it or not.

 

Why would people not support a Scottish player under a GB tag? Unless he had a West Yorkshire accent, because he was from West Yorkshire maybe and they thought he wasn't actually Scottish.

What point are you making here? Your argument is somewhat confusing.

 

Had GB been selling out stadiums left right and centre, then we probably wouldn't even be having this argument now but the fact is they didn't

The splitting of GB into separate home nations had nothing to do with selling out stadiums. There is plenty of evidence to show that GB have achieved equally as good crowds as England, just as there is evidence to show that both teams have attracted poor crowds. The attendance figures have no correlation with the name of the team.

 

just because Garry Schofield and a few other RL luminaries wax lyrical about it, doesn't mean that it was something the entire country agree on.

I'm well aware of that. I don't think I could name a single subject the entire country does agree on!

 

Oh and plenty of English people wanted Murray to fail.

Because he was Scottish? I'm not so sure that long term strategic international planning should pander to xenophobes...

 

People seem to assume that anyone advocating a return to GB wants it at the expense of England and the home nations. For the record - and I've written this countless times on this forum - I want far more international games for England and the home nations, and I also want GB to return in some format to help compliment this as opposed to replacing it.



#39 Scubby

Scubby
  • Coach
  • 4,142 posts

Posted 12 May 2014 - 10:15 AM

GB or England - I really don't care. I just want to see us having the chance to whoop the Aussies over a 3-test series. I actually think this is a better chance for us to topple them than playing them on odd occasions in tournament.

 

A test series is the right team playing with the right form at the right time. If we knocked them off over 3 games there would be no excuses.



#40 thirteenthman

thirteenthman
  • Coach
  • 2,685 posts

Posted 12 May 2014 - 11:22 AM

I'm not really that bothered whether they bring back the GB team. I can see the arguments both ways. What will hurt the development of International RL in this country is the fact that we don't appear to be playing at home til 2016. Two consecutive tours down under, and seemingly no mid season games. Whether the team is England or GB, you won't maintain the interest of all those newcomers who turned out at Wembley and elsewhere last year by not playing any games for them to come and watch. The England 'brand' will never grow if we don't play any games in this country. 


Edited by thirteenthman, 12 May 2014 - 11:23 AM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users