Jump to content

Lions tour 2019 (Merged Threads)


Recommended Posts


  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
On 18/10/2019 at 15:54, GeordieSaint said:

Link to GB attendances (you need to click into each Series):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Britain_national_rugby_league_team_game_results_(1991–present)

Link to England attendances:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_England_national_rugby_league_team_results

Golden age for GB was the early-mid 90s. That's what most people hark back to; what their nostalgic for. But then England have some excellent attendances at places like Wembley, Olympic Stadium and Elland Road since it's inception in 2008 (especially against New Zealand, which are better than against GB).

I should think that whatever guise the team plays under be it GB or England the numbers going through the turnstiles would be the same, I asked all of those dead set against the return of the GB concept would they boycott watching the telecasts of the upcoming series, not one answered that they would, and it would be exactly the same when the Kangaroo's come over next year which ever jersey the team plays in it would not alter the attendance at with any note.

Now we have the WC and all the made up teams of convenience to boost the competition number's a concept that I cannot see will ever change, but I see no reason whatsoever that the GB team cannot be resurrected twixed the WC's, who know's whatever gems may be unearthed of true Welsh, Scot or Irish nationality, the opportunity for those blokes to play at the top level should not be denied them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Now we have the WC and all the made up teams of convenience to boost the competition number's a concept that I cannot see will ever change, but I see no reason whatsoever that the GB team cannot be resurrected twixed the WC's, who know's whatever gems may be unearthed of true Welsh, Scot or Irish nationality, the opportunity for those blokes to play at the top level should not be denied them.

Do you not think it's incredibly hypocritical on your part to think that a single Australian-born player playing for England/GB deligitmises the team, while at the same time repeatedly including Irish players in the team you refer to solely as Great Britain and calling Irish players British?

Why is an Irish player playing for Britain "the top level"? Surely if they're Irish, playing for Ireland and not a different country is the top level?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, damp squib said:

Do you not think it's incredibly hypocritical on your part to think that a single Australian-born player playing for England/GB deligitmises the team, while at the same time repeatedly including Irish players in the team you refer to solely as Great Britain and calling Irish players British?

Why is an Irish player playing for Britain "the top level"? Surely if they're Irish, playing for Ireland and not a different country is the top level?

The top level I refer to as I suspect you already know is the top level in terms of quality, with due respect to Irish player's I cannot see enough of them gathering together to form a team that would be worthy of playing in a test series v The Kangaroo's or Kiwi's but it is not beyond the imagination for a couple to breakthrough to perform in the upper echelons of the sport.

Are you saying that if a Irish born player who like Brian Carney sought his carrear in the British Rugby League SL and even a couple of seasons in the Australian Premier Comp should not be allowed to perform at the pinnacle of the sport?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 18/10/2019 at 15:54, GeordieSaint said:

Link to GB attendances (you need to click into each Series):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Britain_national_rugby_league_team_game_results_(1991–present)

Link to England attendances:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_England_national_rugby_league_team_results

Golden age for GB was the early-mid 90s. That's what most people hark back to; what their nostalgic for. But then England have some excellent attendances at places like Wembley, Olympic Stadium and Elland Road since it's inception in 2008 (especially against New Zealand, which are better than against GB).

I would say 2013-2015 was our golden age 

2013 Eng v NZ 67,500

2015 Eng v NZ 44,600

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

I would say 2013-2015 was our golden age 

2013 Eng v NZ 67,500

2015 Eng v NZ 44,600

Yep, people forget that in 1989 only 18k turned up at Old Trafford and 13k at Elland Road for NZ v GB tests despite this golden era with Hanley, Offiah, Schofield, Gregory, Ward, Lydon et al. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

The top level I refer to as I suspect you already know is the top level in terms of quality, with due respect to Irish player's I cannot see enough of them gathering together to form a team that would be worthy of playing in a test series v The Kangaroo's or Kiwi's but it is not beyond the imagination for a couple to breakthrough to perform in the upper echelons of the sport.

Are you saying that if a Irish born player who like Brian Carney sought his carrear in the British Rugby League SL and even a couple of seasons in the Australian Premier Comp should not be allowed to perform at the pinnacle of the sport?

Remarkable bit of typing bearing in mind you did it standing on your head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Scubby said:

Yep, people forget that in 1989 only 18k turned up at Old Trafford and 13k at Elland Road for NZ v GB tests despite this golden era with Hanley, Offiah, Schofield, Gregory, Ward, Lydon et al. 

In the end England is a far more marketable brand than Great Britain. Look at the popularity of England's football,cricket and yawnion team. It resonates with English people watching England play undisputable fact. Not "great britian"(which was really just England with a changed name and we made a big mistake when we did that look at the history of GB RL). That's just a tough pill some RL fans need to swallow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

I would say 2013-2015 was our golden age 

2013 Eng v NZ 67,500

2015 Eng v NZ 44,600

Not really. Between 1990 and 1992, GB played 23 internationals (not including other tour games). Between 2013 and 2015, England played just 13 internationals. The Ashes tours of the early-mid 90s were very big business with Old Trafford and Elland Road selling out. Also there was a World Cup Final in 92 with approx 73k at Wembley.

I think the fact that GB played more frequently in the early 90s meant that RL was in the consciousness of the wider public more often. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

In point of fact, only one of those names played in the 1989 series I believe.

Depends if they meant Mike Gregory or Andy Gregory. From my old VHS "Great Britain tame the Kiwis", I remember Mike Gregory (captain) and Offiah played.

Now I'm curious to know - if Hanley, Andy Gregory, Lydon, Schofield, etc. didn't play in that series, why was that? Surely they weren't all injured?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

Not really. Between 1990 and 1992, GB played 23 internationals (not including other tour games). Between 2013 and 2015, England played just 13 internationals. The Ashes tours of the early-mid 90s were very big business with Old Trafford and Elland Road selling out. Also there was a World Cup Final in 92 with approx 73k at Wembley.

I think the fact that GB played more frequently in the early 90s meant that RL was in the consciousness of the wider public more often. 

 

Does golden age equate to number of games played? I would say no.

There was a World Cup Final in 2013 in England with 74,500 people there, despite England not making the Final. 

Then 40,000 went to watch Australia v New Zealand at Anfield in 2016 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, 17 stone giant said:

Depends if they meant Mike Gregory or Andy Gregory. From my old VHS "Great Britain tame the Kiwis", I remember Mike Gregory (captain) and Offiah played.

Now I'm curious to know - if Hanley, Andy Gregory, Lydon, Schofield, etc. didn't play in that series, why was that? Surely they weren't all injured?

Lydon was definitely a sub in one of the games. Edwards played so that may have been at the expense of some of the others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

The top level I refer to as I suspect you already know is the top level in terms of quality, with due respect to Irish player's I cannot see enough of them gathering together to form a team that would be worthy of playing in a test series v The Kangaroo's or Kiwi's but it is not beyond the imagination for a couple to breakthrough to perform in the upper echelons of the sport.

Are you saying that if a Irish born player who like Brian Carney sought his carrear in the British Rugby League SL and even a couple of seasons in the Australian Premier Comp should not be allowed to perform at the pinnacle of the sport?

That's not the point.. why would an Irishman play for Great Britain as you continue to call it.. if it was Great Britsin and Ireland they may be more interested.. otherwise they would only be able to play via residency or grandparents which we already know (over and over) that you have an issue with... 

So what is it? Do you actually not have an issue with the rules.or are you continually wrong to refer to it as GB. 

 

BTW I think GB is wrong.. it's a mistake, it's the wrong way to go and I wouldn't have done it.. it doesn't mean I hate the concept, I'll still watch it I just think they would have been better and it would have been an easier sell to everyone if they played as England... it's not as black and white as love it or hate it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

My mistake, also directed at any lady moaners as well.

"Then son" what qulaifies you to be so patronising with an attitude of what I should imagine to be self appointed superiority?

 

 

Sorry kid, the fact that I called you son should have made you realise I was assuming you were Male as well - so sorry darling. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Does golden age equate to number of games played? I would say no.

Depends on the subjective interpretation of what 'golden age' means. How old are you, if you don't mind me asking? If you're old enough to remember both periods well then fair enough. However, I still respectfully disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.