World rugby league

[yanto]

17 minutes ago, flyingking said:

I have just had a look at the criteria for GAISF membership. It is worth going through them in detail

Which criteria do you need to satisfy to become a FULL Member of GAISF:

Main Criteria 1: No Conflict – No Rivalry with GAISF Members (art 7.A.4.1)

World Rugby can claim unjustly there is a confict, appears to be no appeals process to counter this

Main Criteria 2:

Global Representation/Recognitions (art 7.A.4.8, 7.A.4.9, 7.A.4.10, 7.A.4.11)

For summer sports, at least 40 active Member National Federations from at least 3 continents

What is a National Federation?:
(art 7.A.6): A National Federation is a body representing a sport or a number of sports in a country that is recognised by the NOC and/or the highest sporting authority of the country;

A number of countries that play rugby league will not coubt towards the 40 because thanks to interference by the other code recognition has been blocked

Organizational Criteria:

Only Federation on a World Level (art 7.A.4.2) This is where the existence of a rival "international federation" is really damaging. Sports administrators who have never heard of rugby league are not automatically going to know that one of the bodies is long established or that the other one is a fake and fraudulently claiming authority over a sport that it does not have any jurisdiction over

Not for Profit (art 7.A.4.3)

WADA Signatory – Compliant (art 7.A.4.4) Yes, box ticked, but you have to go right to the bottom of the list https://www.wada-ama.org/en/code-signatories

CAS Jurisdiction (art 7.A.4.4) CAS has heard several cases of rugby league players in NRL and Super League trying to overturn drug bans

Gender Representation (art 7.A.4.5) RLIF has an all male board

History General Assembly (art 7.A.4.6 and 7.A.4.7)

Accounting Standards (art 7.A.4.14)

Strategic Plan (art 7.A.4.15) Until very recently RLIF did not appear to have a strategic plan. They have got one now, but it appears to change every few months

So after twelve years since I brought the GAISF to the attention of the RLEF they still have not met the criteria...So again instead of blaming a small new tuppency band rebel group ask why our own leaders have not addressed these problems before WRL came on the scene.

Its our own fault this group is now apparently the new problem.

Come on guys for TWELVE years we have been looking to join GAISF ..or have we ???

[eal]

It shows the weakness of the RLIF that a group of muppets with a cheap website could actually pose a threat.

[yanto]

3 hours ago, eal said:

It shows the weakness of the RLIF that a group of muppets with a cheap website could actually pose a threat.

Correct.

[Mister Ting]

If this situation isn't at the very least, seen to be a matter of concern to the RLIF, RLF and NRL within the next few weeks, then we can be sure that the powers that be do not take the wellbeing of the game as seriously as they should.

[RP London]

8 hours ago, yanto said:

So after twelve years since I brought the GAISF to the attention of the RLEF they still have not met the criteria...So again instead of blaming a small new tuppency band rebel group ask why our own leaders have not addressed these problems before WRL came on the scene.

Its our own fault this group is now apparently the new problem.

Come on guys for TWELVE years we have been looking to join GAISF ..or have we ???

This, this and ten times this!

Sums up the point I was making.. 

 

[langpark]

In fairness though, 12 years ago, we didn't have half the members we do today.  Plus we are not dealing with the most transparent of organisations here in the GAISF that keep moving the goalposts and ignoring an application that does tick all the boxes (way more so than some of the other farcical excuses for "sports" that have been accepted in recent years).

[TheLegendOfTexEvans]

8 hours ago, eal said:

It shows the weakness of the RLIF that a group of muppets with a cheap website could actually pose a threat.

It would be funny, if it werent true.

 

[DoubleD]

13 hours ago, yanto said:

So after twelve years since I brought the GAISF to the attention of the RLEF they still have not met the criteria...So again instead of blaming a small new tuppency band rebel group ask why our own leaders have not addressed these problems before WRL came on the scene.

Its our own fault this group is now apparently the new problem.

Come on guys for TWELVE years we have been looking to join GAISF ..or have we ???

That's not quite true, the criteria has recently been amended. When the RLIF most recently submitted, they did meet the criteria, until the other code put their oar in

[RP London]

1 hour ago, DoubleD said:

That's not quite true, the criteria has recently been amended. When the RLIF most recently submitted, they did meet the criteria, until the other code put their oar in

As a major governing body they should have been able to meet the criteria especially when you look at some of the sports on there who have done it.. the fact they havent been able to get the house in order has allowed the opportunity for this World Rugby League thing to occur.. it shouldnt have ever got to this point.. if you know there are foxes on the prowl you dont leave the gate to the hen house open you shut it and add an extra fence!

[DoubleD]

12 minutes ago, RP London said:

As a major governing body they should have been able to meet the criteria especially when you look at some of the sports on there who have done it.. the fact they havent been able to get the house in order has allowed the opportunity for this World Rugby League thing to occur.. it shouldnt have ever got to this point.. if you know there are foxes on the prowl you dont leave the gate to the hen house open you shut it and add an extra fence!

As I said, they did meet the criteria, before the criteria just became more stringent. It is well published that the reason we haven't already been granted it in the past 2-3 years is due to union's influence.

[RP London]

1 minute ago, DoubleD said:

As I said, they did meet the criteria, before the criteria just became more stringent. It is well published that the reason we haven't already been granted it in the past 2-3 years is due to union's influence.

and the 9 years before that?

[DoubleD]

1 hour ago, RP London said:

and the 9 years before that?

I'm not denying that. But we go back to the fact that the RLIF is a toothless figment of an organisation. Until recently, it didn't have any full time employees. The game has been run for the interests of 2/3 countries. This is the crux of the issue.

The RLIF needs to become a proper organisation/administration, however people will moan when it drains funds away from development. However, they certainly need a greater representation from other nations and competent people working there to centrally negotiate sponsorship, TV deals etc. as we have seen from the current WC that there is a big appetite for it, and under the current arrangement of it being sub-contracted to the host nation, these matters are then structured to that nation's benefit - such as the match times in the current WC

[TheLegendOfTexEvans]

Reading the Qatar story. If the offer of Doha tournament (9s?) Is there we should take it.

Now is the time to enforce the crediability of the RLIF and bring more nations to the international stage.

 

[RP London]

54 minutes ago, DoubleD said:

I'm not denying that. But we go back to the fact that the RLIF is a toothless figment of an organisation. Until recently, it didn't have any full time employees. The game has been run for the interests of 2/3 countries. This is the crux of the issue.

The RLIF needs to become a proper organisation/administration, however people will moan when it drains funds away from development. However, they certainly need a greater representation from other nations and competent people working there to centrally negotiate sponsorship, TV deals etc. as we have seen from the current WC that there is a big appetite for it, and under the current arrangement of it being sub-contracted to the host nation, these matters are then structured to that nation's benefit - such as the match times in the current WC

Totally agree... the argument from people about draining money annoys me too, it's a red herring as it's investing money into something that if done properly can make much more.. with more international presence you get more funding from governments and multinational companies etc.. but people see that initial "cost" and go bananas 

[TheLegendOfTexEvans]

3 hours ago, RP London said:

Totally agree... the argument from people about draining money annoys me too, it's a red herring as it's investing money into something that if done properly can make much more.. with more international presence you get more funding from governments and multinational companies etc.. but people see that initial "cost" and go bananas 

If you want to be taken seriously you need to have an international game. 

We cant complain about poor sponsorship or lack of engagement from people like the BBC. 

If you behave the way we do as a sport.  Opportunites are wasted, often because if internal politics and jobsworth-ness.

Be it the Somoa v England farce with pay per view.

Not bothering to raise the profile of internationals because we have structured the game so we only tell people about England games.

 We are happy for games to be played in front of empty stadiums because they fall outside of the jurisdiction of the RFL or the ARLC.

People outside the political structure just see empty stadiums or worse dont even know games have existed.

We also have the "favourite son" approach to press releases by the RLEF.  With only approved events and countries being reported on.

World Rugby League are right in one respect the politics of the RLEF and RLIF are taking our game nowhere and we need a split.

Which is why a dodgy group like this has any serious traction.  Think they can claim any kind of legitimacy.

The following article by Robert Burgin,  tells it straight in his Viking Harvest article.

He also mentions that a breakaway is possible for the international game.

http://www.theroar.com.au/2017/02/25/rugby-league-rlif-2017-rlwc-viking-harvest/

Someone who has since openly come out and denounced World Rugby League I might add.

Robert is someone who genuinely cares about the game and doing things the right way.

These private discussions of a breakaway federation are something that is being cynically exploited.

As a sport we need to see the bigger picture.

 

 

 

 

[Futtocks]

4 hours ago, TheLegendOfTexEvans said:

Reading the Qatar story. If the offer of Doha tournament (9s?) Is there we should take it.

Now is the time to enforce the crediability of the RLIF and bring more nations to the international stage.

Get the corruption and dirty money on our side for a change?

[Copa]

2 hours ago, Futtocks said:

Get the corruption and dirty money on our side for a change?

Yes. Absolutely.

[TheLegendOfTexEvans]

12 hours ago, Futtocks said:

Get the corruption and dirty money on our side for a change?

If was to read Dubai, I just wonder if it would be treated differently.

A lot of the criticism can be equally applied.