RP London

got to say i disagree 100% with pretty much everything you have said. For a start, as i pointed out, there are some sports that only surivive thanks to the international game and the money pumped into the clubs from that and sited examples.. the ARU are another one so not sure why you have put them in as an example of what i said not being true.. it is an absolute example of what i am saying. Without a vibrant International game they would be struggling even more at club level. As it is they can use the money from the international game to support clubs and to try and re grow it.. (I dont know who the FFA is and googling it only brings up some random american organisation... if you mean anything to do with the football then thats a different argument due to the money in other leagues etc). If England RL have been solely concentrating on international RL for as long as you can remember then you obvisouly are very very young.. even taking away the pandemic IF Australia had toured here last year that would have been the first England International played for 2 years... 2 years FFS!!!. even if you take GB as England (which would be fair) then they would have been the first home international for 2 years... 2 years!!!! what other sport that has any semblance of an international game does that! we cannot even get mid season breaks sorted for internationals for christs sake! there is no way anyone has been taking the international game seriously since they scrapped the 4 nations, and perhaps even before that.. to say that "English RL has been focused on international footy for just about as long as I can remember" is ludicrous in the extreme! Olympic sports are slightly different, you do see uplifts of participation in the sports immediately after and you see kids out on the streets etc.. but individual sports are different to team sports and its helped with success. Field Hockey has been growing in participation numbers since their success on the field in 2016 for example with statistics to back it up from places like statista. Womens football has seen both participation and spectator numbers increase (up until the pandemic) thanks to increased coverage of the international game. There are plenty of examples of this happening.. But of course it isnt the magic bullet that will cure all ills without anyone doing anything else.. that would be idiotic and is not what i said.. it then has to be run with by the the clubs, once you have caught the imagination of people. You will get people who go and support castelford becuase they saw England on tv.. i'm not saying they will travel to watch them but they may look out for them on tv, engage with them on social media etc and then there are things to sell to them, helping the club game.. The idea that its a one off is not going to work, it needs constant and regular internationals, it needs good FTA coverage of the highlights of the league and so on. The international game can catch people who may not otherwise tune in, that is the point, and from then the clubs have to work on it getting them down to play, train, watch etc but the international game can do so much to get the initial spark. Equally a good international structure that is profitable can help be fed back into the clubs and the game as a whole (as RU and Cricket do, as i exampled earlier).. We have actually been trying your way for years as we have not had a recognisable international format or calendar or even team playing.. and its just not working. Every time internationals are on I have people asking me about the game because they stumble across it on a weekend.. (as i do with the RU international matches) but hardly ever get talked to about Rugby at any other time.. its all football round here.. Its just an example of how internationals catch the imagination and can add a spark.. something the club game cannot do unless you are from that town IMHO.

for me this is 100% it.. most of the issues are the 1 person testing positive means 6-7 isolating.. we are not seeing 6-7 testing positive.. when its juts 1 going down it will be just an injury or an illness in normal times.

I think he is also being a bit disingenuous for saying "It was obvious that there wasn't a cat in hells chance of getting through it, but as usual they like many on here adopted the policy of 'if we don't look at it it doesn't exsist'" when actually they come up with a "solution" that was agreed upon and is now playing out.. whether you like that "solution" or not is a different debate its still a solution and its working for how it was designed. The fact its chicken coming home to roost in terms of being so desperate for cash (and thinking the only way is more fixtures) that they cannot say we'll do the same length season but with less games (therefore gap weekends to put in postponements, and also to let players recover) is a fair point.

This will all settle down as soon as the contact isolation stops needing to happen. At the moment there are big businesses shutting down due to contact isolation, shops closing due to lack of staff, factories I know have decided to move their 2 week close down to stop them being affected (sure that was a popular move for anyone with holidays booked during the original close)... we are all in a "make do and mend" situation. The league is a challenge, but then so is everything at the moment, but it certainly doesnt mean nothing IMHO.

Yes the fans would care, but I am guessing they will get over it. But a key, maybe THE key, to the world cup success is the interest it garners from people who are not already fans.. and will they care? I would argue not..

while that is true the opposite is also true in that to get a strong vibrant local competition you need international competition to spark the interest of those not already embedded in the sport and also to keep that spark of something different in those that are already fans. For example, to encourage someone in Bristol to enjoy the game an international match involving England on terrestrial television will spark an interest, one they wouldnt necessarily have watching 2 teams from places unknown (a cup final may do this out of general interest of a large event). Everyone can associate with their national team. This sparks an interest which then gets them looking for a team to support etc etc. Also someone in an area with a struggling club can look forward to international competition too and keeps an interest when the club is going through the mire. For the most part, rather than chicken and egg, it is the international game that can spark this revival in the club game, to start a sport an international scene is really important. A good performance by GB Ice Hockey at the winter olympics etc would see a surge of people through the gates at arenas in the major ice hockey areas without a doubt, the job then is to keep them coming. It also see rises in participation levels, again the key is to keep it going. While I sympathise with the stand you are taking and the way you are looking at it, i would argue that actually the international game MUST work independently and sit there as the one constant, it then ploughs its profits back into the domestic game to raise the standards of that (see RU and Cricket for good examples of this, whereby without the international game the clubs/counties would be dead or amateur).

totally agree.. every reason they have given so far can be argued against with proof of other people managing to overcome those issues.. it is all about will and the Aussie RL team seem to have none.

yes agree... and the thing is neutrals wouldnt think Fiji or samoa would be fantastic 7s teams but they are, or samoa in 1991 in the RU world cup (sorry) which made people stand up and take notice.. The neutral may not think Tonga are a world class outfit but let them watch 20 minutes of the game.. then its different.

again though for new people they wont know or care... if we win it that is what will grab the headlines not Australia werent here but look what we won anyway. This is about the new people to the sport, we desperately need them.. As actual RL fans we're never bloody happy anyway!

I dont disagree that to RL fans we would prefer Australia to be there.. however, as we have seen, australia can be beaten by others, it is not their god given right to be in the final, and they are beatable, as seen last time they graced the international stage with their presence. Therefore (depending on the draw) we could play NZ or Tonga in the final anyway as they could have knocked them out previously.. so shame yes but i would celebrate it anyway and you can only beat whats in front of you. However, that is for the RL fan, to me the world cup is massive for bringing new none RL lovers to the game and, unless everyone bangs on and on about it, i dont think any would care. Just seeing and England Captain lift the trophy would grab attention and that is what we need..

they're saying move it/cancel it as we wont be coming this year... thats them trying to dictate to the RLWC.. sorry but we can differ on opinion of how it will affect it but I cannot see how you can believe that they are not trying to dictate this to their own interests.

i've got new punters going to England v Greece... they know its going to be a stonking but their attitude is "its a world cup".. I have tickets for the final, no matter who is in it, my whole family are coming, my wife and daughter are coming "because its a world cup final"... they wont care australia arent in the tournament, frankly they probably wont know.. New punters are game by game.. they want to go and watch a world cup, they are wanting to watch X vs Y.. the fact that in another game somewhere else Australia are no longer playing is going to be largely irrelevant. The biggest problem to overcome will be the refunds for the australia games already sold.. but depending on who comes in maybe those games will be fine as the group games may well be closer anyway! As said earlier, some people will be affected as new punters but most will be ok and that is what we have to deal with.

I am far too excited for it and I'm not bothered if Australia cannot bring themselves to come over... though i think they will in the end.

apologies.. honestly I thought he was for real at the start..

which is the sort of semantics that no one will care about IMHO.. (i agree by the way) A picture of England holding the world cup above their head on the back page of the newspaper will catch peoples attention.. even if it says "but Australia weren't there" will be hidden in the text and either seen but not thought about or not even seen.. there will be some as per @Johnoco (sorry mutli quoting from different pages without losing what you are typing is beyond me) but we need to get the larger numbers that just dont know/care/be arsed to work it out.. we just need to grab some attention, once we have it then we have to run with it (and that is the key... ) The problem is, as always, what we do afterwards with the interest we may garner, before they actually give a toss that australia werent there, which they will, granted, once they get into the sport but by that point hopefully they will remember COVID and this sort of stuff happened but also they will be hooked with the club game (and a few internationals, please god got the international game sorted)! Thats why i dont think its important.. for those that know they are probably already into the game, some will miss it completely and be hooked therefore who cares, there'll be some that will know they arent there but be hooked anyway so who cares, then there are those that will care (but these are likely to be people that we wouldnt hook anyway).. we need new fans and the international game, with our without Australia is a really good way to get them initially.

no thats rubbish.. I'm not saying that play offs are right or that they are wrong.. I am not saying they are the right way to product champions or get relegated.. what i am saying is that in a system where we have the play offs then to say that the team that finished 4th and goes on to win them is not the worthy champions is illogical.. teams prepare and they work to the rules that are set out at the beginning of the season. If the rule that had been in place was that top wins then you would see a completely different looking table (potentially. change one small thing and everything changes). In terms of the bottom of the table the same argument stands. It is what you start the season with and therefore teams play to that.. proven by the period with the Super 8s. When a team was destined for the middle 8 they potentially rested a few players to be ready for the most important part of the season which was to stay up.. where they finished in the bottom 4 didnt overly matter, what mattered was where they finished in the middle 8s. The bottom team was not necessarily the worst (or second to bottom second worst etc) as it was irrelevant to the final goal of staying up.

i think thats exactly what they did and i think Mr Beaumont knew that.. I think what he was working on was there was money to be made in Super League with having fixtures on and being on telly, that he could not make in the championship this season. There was also the chance that they would not relegate them (if covid hit again) and it was better to be in if that happened than not. He hasnt spent like a mad man and therefore next year he should be able to bounce back up.. personally as much as i think the decision was flawed from the SL/RFL i dont blame DB for giving it a go, if they survive somehow it will have been a great decision, if they dont but he has managed it well then Leigh are still possibly in a better situation than they could have been.

this was my thought... no real impact this year except maybe tv viewing (if they have a deal) and general interest (maybe travel numbers but that depends very much on the rules at the time). 2025 on the other hand could then be a watershed moment.. hosting it and with some success previously on the club front could be massive in getting participation levels and "taking it seriously" a semi final would then be a massive step up for them but also potentially a leap forward for the game.

not a chance.. it was coherent.

its the "players will be safe" argument... the players will be as safe here in october as anywhere else in the world, perhaps safer. There can be bubbles to make even more sure of that.. its not a safety angle.. and if they are worried about the "safety" of the shorter turn around then its just hypocrytical with SoO and backing up.. they can always give the small number of players who will make the latter stages a couple of extra weeks off.. its really not a big issue.. unless you want it to be.

oh yes.. there are plenty of example of his babies being a complete and utter disaster... but lets at least beat him with a stick he deserves, there are enough to chose from after all!

Honestly.. i dont agree. I think it will mostly go unnoticed by the majority of the people we need to get interested in the game. Unless, of course, we shout about it too much and make it seem less worthy.. if we are all positive about the tournament i dont see it as being an issue at all.

you're making the same error as gould is... basing a decision on todays information rather than on how the modelling is. We are fully open, our stadia are open. With the vaccination programme (the best in the world) going to plan, infection rates (and more importantly hospitalisation rates) will be very low by October and November.

really?? the african representative zimbabwe got beaten twice having 60 and then 70 points put on them in 1987 then three times over 50 points in 1991?? the extra team brought in instead of South Africa were roundly walloped.. yes they had/have more depth at the top level but lets remember Tonga beat Australia last year, New Zealand were 2008 world champs, they only won the 2017 world cup by 6 points in a tight affair they could have easily lost... the winner could well have won it even if Australia were there. That is the point.. not about what happens further down but could someone else really have won it if they were there, and the answer is yes.. so play on!

He;s also making up the fact that the chairman of the International Rugby Board is from the UK and that its "his baby".. the chairman is an australian for a start and he has only been in post that long.. he just sees how important it is and is pushing for it to happen.