Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

JM2010

Ideas for International game

63 posts in this topic

The AMNRL aren't eligible for full membership based on the criteria, but the USARL would be. It depends who they decide to choose, I hope they don't just pick the AMNRL because 'they were there first'. The AMNRL aren't even affiliate members, so they should never have been allowed in the WCQ on that basis. 

 

Selling the 2017 TV rights already is one of the stupidest ever moves. That means the likes of the USA won't be able to watch the tournament again. #####ing joke!

why wouldn't the US be able to watch the tournament? If some TV channel from there would want to broadcast it they could buy the rights for the US market from however has them. Don't hold your breath about it happening though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Selling the 2017 TV rights already is one of the stupidest ever moves. That means the likes of the USA won't be able to watch the tournament again. #####ing joke!

It likely just means they've sold the TV rights to the host nation as they're the ones that will be doing most of the work around it (ie filming and commentary), and most countries will just be buying their feed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The AMNRL aren't eligible for full membership based on the criteria, but the USARL would be. It depends who they decide to choose, I hope they don't just pick the AMNRL because 'they were there first'. The AMNRL aren't even affiliate members, so they should never have been allowed in the WCQ on that basis. 

 

Selling the 2017 TV rights already is one of the stupidest ever moves. That means the likes of the USA won't be able to watch the tournament again. #####ing joke!

 

Fox sports extra which is a channel in the USA have been showing many many NRL and SL games this season. I just watched the whole of the magic weekend on that channel. I don't know if they would over the WC though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fox sports extra which is a channel in the USA have been showing many many NRL and SL games this season. I just watched the whole of the magic weekend on that channel. I don't know if they would over the WC though.

 

We sold the WCs 2013 and 2017 as one package though, that's what I'm complaining about, no other sport in the world does that. It also means once again only England games will be available on the BBc and the rest will be on Premier Sports, if they'll even still be around then. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/no-helmets-required/2014/may/21/rugby-league-super-magic-weekend-fair

 

This article pretty much confirms it will be only full members in 2017. "Only full members can compete in the World Cup now, of which there are just 18. Active countries not in that group include aspirational Malta and Canada, plus two of the success stories of the 2013 World Cup: USA and Italy, both of whom have two domestic competitions."

 

And then there's this:

 

Steve Mascord ‏@therealsteavis  14h

Today in @RLWFarandWide page 92 of @LeagueWeek - how the RLIF has schemed to stop countries using their fulltime pros in WC qualifiers.

@packnaught I think the RLIF want the strongest countries in the World Cup - not the countries that sent most people to Oz 50 years ago

 

I think they seem to be only picking on Italy and the USA with regards to their WC squads, but what about nations like Ireland, Scotland, Lebanon, Tonga and CIs who will be heavily reliant on NRL and SL heritage players for their squad? I can't see how Ireland would qualify with only locals up against nations like Russia and Serbia. Then again, others would disagree, but I'd rather see nations like Serbia at the WC than Ireland, due to the huge difference in development. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the links. Steve Mascords comments about the 'strongest nations' are more than a little ironic, particularly if it's only picking from the 18 'full members'. Maybe the RLIF should have a look again at what exactly qualifies a country to be a full member. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We sold the WCs 2013 and 2017 as one package though, that's what I'm complaining about, no other sport in the world does that. It also means once again only England games will be available on the BBc and the rest will be on Premier Sports, if they'll even still be around then. 

 

The Union World Cup signed a contract for both the 2011 and 2015 tournaments with ITV at the same time in 2010. In fact the previous deal was for 2 tournaments as well.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We sold the WCs 2013 and 2017 as one package though, that's what I'm complaining about, no other sport in the world does that. It also means once again only England games will be available on the BBc and the rest will be on Premier Sports, if they'll even still be around then.

I take your point. Fox may have ancilliary secondary rights to the US market. I hope so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/no-helmets-required/2014/may/21/rugby-league-super-magic-weekend-fair

 

This article pretty much confirms it will be only full members in 2017. "Only full members can compete in the World Cup now, of which there are just 18. Active countries not in that group include aspirational Malta and Canada, plus two of the success stories of the 2013 World Cup: USA and Italy, both of whom have two domestic competitions."

 

And then there's this:

 

Steve Mascord ‏@therealsteavis  14h

Today in @RLWFarandWide page 92 of @LeagueWeek - how the RLIF has schemed to stop countries using their fulltime pros in WC qualifiers.

Steve Mascord ‏@therealsteavis  13h

@packnaught I think the RLIF want the strongest countries in the World Cup - not the countries that sent most people to Oz 50 years ago

 

I think they seem to be only picking on Italy and the USA with regards to their WC squads, but what about nations like Ireland, Scotland, Lebanon, Tonga and CIs who will be heavily reliant on NRL and SL heritage players for their squad? I can't see how Ireland would qualify with only locals up against nations like Russia and Serbia. Then again, others would disagree, but I'd rather see nations like Serbia at the WC than Ireland, due to the huge difference in development.

They need to make these countries full members asap then. Italy has many clubs, the US is growing, Canada is also very pro active and Jamaica have leagues, schools, colleges and already play an international schedule. Ireland seem to be dropping back or stagnating to be fair. Do they meet the qualifications for full membership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They need to make these countries full members asap then. Italy has many clubs, the US is growing, Canada is also very pro active and Jamaica have leagues, schools, colleges and already play an international schedule. Ireland seem to be dropping back or stagnating to be fair. Do they meet the qualifications for full membership.

 

I don't think Italy has enough clubs to be full members, even including the 'rebel' teams. Also their season isn't long enough either, it has to be over 10 weeks and they have no youth. The USARL would meet full membership, but the AMNRL wouldn't be able to. Canada will need to run a youth league and a reserve league to be full members, Jamaica already are so there'll be fine. Ireland has no junior development, though they've just started up something. Their domestic league also isn't longer than 10 weeks, so realistically they shouldn't be full members. The same is true with South Africa as well, no junior development. Not really sure on Samoa, Tonga or the CIs, as we never hear anything from them. I think that the Czech Republic and Greece are close to full membership, with domestic teams, reserve leagues and they are working on junior development. 

 

This is what was in Steve Mascord's article:
"Far&wide can reveal that the WC qualifiers will take place in July -deliberately ruling out full-time pros from taking part.

The federation sees this as a way to ensure the strongest countries get through, rather than the countries who can call on the most heritage players from Australia and England.

We are also told there will be a new qualifying group in Africa and the Middle East, which should make it easier for the well-organised South Africa to get through.

But when it is announced that the top seven teams from the last world cup will qualify for the 2017 tournament, watch out for the fireworks - make that "rockets' red glare" - from America. On points difference in the quarters, they finished eighth.

Without coming out and saying so, the RLIF is hinting with this development - along with the stipulation that only full members can take part in the next tournament - that having Italian and American sides stacked with expats last year was a mistake."

 
I think they're wrong there tbf, if the USARL are accepted membership, then I can't see why the US would fail to qualify with a homegrown team, as they have beaten Canada and Jamaica regularly with domestic players. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of Steve Mascords comments on a few different topics have been a little odd lately, certainly for someone who knows the International game better than most. His comments about sides stacked with expats is bizarre considering the number of full member nations who do exactly that at every WC. And the idea of the 'well organised South Africa' making the WC might sound nice, but is a nation that doesn't even play full Internationals ready for the elevation.

 

The notion of getting the 'strongest nations' to the WC would be laudible if when they got there they didn't just fly a plane load of Aussies, Kiwis and Englishmen in. Unless of course Mascord is saying that in the qualifiers it's not OK to play heritage players, but when you actually reach the WC, pick as many as you want. Interesting to see what the RLIF decide with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, it has to be said what about Wales? If you're not allowed to pick 'full time players', does that rule out the likes of Ben Flower, Lloyd White, Rhys Evans etc.from helping them to qualify? The RLIF needs to understand the difference between heritage players and products of that countries development system. Though I agree, it is about time they cut down on the ridiculous number of heritage players being used. A team full of 17 Aussies isn't international sport. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd assume the article is just badly written by Steve, and really only refers to the likes of Italy flying in Aussies for qualifiers, which I think is what nations like Russia object to. If you have full time players in your country, then there wouldn't be a problem with that. The reference to playing in July, I assume, simply refers to the fact it would be more difficult to fly heritage players out to Europe mid season that it would be in October. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017