Bring back the 4 Nations

[Dave T]

7 minutes ago, londonrlfan said:

Only 3 countries competing. There needs to be more opportunities, especially given Tonga are probably stronger than NZ now anyway. 

that isnt the flaw he highlighted. And that is why we moved on to 4 teams, and eventually should have been 8, expand as the teams got stronger.

[Southerner80]

1 hour ago, londonrlfan said:

Maybe back in the old days, but winning the WC would be the pinnacle now. 

As a fan I would say a WC is great to get the publics attention however to win a 3 game series v Oz... Would be bigger IMO for the hard core fans. Its over 3 games so no one can say you got lucky. 

[Luckycreed]

Beating Australia in a best of three series is a more testing assignment than winning a world cup, so deep down I very much doubt that.The Rugby League world cup is boring, too much filler Australia are still flogging some unfortunate in  the semi final.

I find tournament football boring. I think it's a cultural thing. Britain is a soccer culture and in that sport the international game means big biannual tournaments with lots of countries and people on here want international league to look like soccer or six nations Rugby.

But of course it can't replicate either of them it doesn't have the depth of soccer and there is only one and a half countries in  Europe where the game has any kind of following so it can't replicate the six nations, but it could replicate  ashes cricket which last time I checked was still doing good business.

I grew up in a Rugby League, cricket culture were international sport meant test series with the odd world cup chucked in for a bit of novelty value.I was very happy with the way the international game was structured up until 1995 ever since then it  has been a dogs breakfast full of meaningless tournaments that are forgotten  within seconds of them finishing

Eighty years of tradition being flushed down the toilet would be ok if what replaced it had the international game  thriving, but it's not, it's all over the shop  Tonga and Samoa are simply the product of migration patterns nothing to do with growth in the international game 

[The Future is League]

OK i know my opinion is not worth as much as other's on here, but in my opinion the biggest honour i team sport is to play for your country. Not a city, not a city suburb or state but your country

[Luckycreed]

1 hour ago, Southerner80 said:

As a fan I would say a WC is great to get the publics attention however to win a 3 game series v Oz... Would be bigger IMO for the hard core fans. Its over 3 games so no one can say you got lucky. 

i can't comment on what would happen in England but if Australia were touring this year instead of New  Zealand and you took the series, and then two years later you were coming down here to try and hold on to the"ashes" we would be getting state of origin type tv ratings for at least the first two tests.

The truth is international Rugby League down here was always about Anglo Australian football, the Kiwis were never big draw cards,  the Frenchmen were in the forties and fifties but interest in them fell away during the sixties.After the hard fought series in 1990 the 92 gb tour was huge right up there with origin and you didn't even win in 1990 , one series win is all it would take,

[Dr Tim Whatley]

5 hours ago, Dave T said:

It is a bit of a tragedy that this has just died without a suitable replacement being secured.

We have gone miles backwards here.

I think the 4N had it's flaws since it moved from a 3N, but with the strength of some of the other nations, this really should have been expanding, ideally to the 8 that was pencilled in.

We are just fannying  around with the odd match here and there. 

Fannying around.

The administration of this sport summed up in two words.

[Luckycreed]

1 hour ago, The Future is League said:

OK i know my opinion is not worth as much as other's on here, but in my opinion the biggest honour i team sport is to play for your country. Not a city, not a city suburb or state but your country

The issue in Australia isn't with the players it is with the games supporters.They just expect Australia to win and don't get excited when it happens, and when Australia lose there is this " that is the shot in the arm the international game needs"kind of sentiment rather than deep distress about it.

While if you are playing interstate football for QLD you know the whole of the QLD  Rugby League community and beyond to people who don't even follow the NRL desperately want you to win.

When QLD lose it's like a really nasty toothache that lingers for days. I can't even imagine what playing for QLD must be like, probably a bit like playing for the All Blacks I guess, 

[Sports Prophet]

6 hours ago, The Future is League said:

OK i know my opinion is not worth as much as other's on here, but in my opinion the biggest honour i team sport is to play for your country. Not a city, not a city suburb or state but your country

You would think. In an amateur world, certainly.

However, I reckon if you posed that question to any number of professionals playing in the NBA, NHL or MLB, the overwhelming majority of responses would not include representing their country as the biggest honour.

[roughyedspud]

12 hours ago, Dave T said:

Where is the flaw?

Australia & nz got weeks off...GB had to play 5 tests back to back

[17 stone giant]

12 hours ago, Luckycreed said:

Beating Australia in a best of three series is a more testing assignment than winning a world cup

Yes, it is, but it doesn't automatically mean that as a fan you'd want that most of all. I mean, you might do - there's no right or wrong answer here - but it's down to personal preference.

For example, if the England football team played a three match series against Brazil (or whoever was the top ranked team in the world at the time), it would almost certainly be harder to win that, than it would the football World Cup (especially judging by the draw we had in 2018!). Yet football fans would still much rather win the World Cup than a three match series against any opposition.

I appreciate that this example isn't that great, because obviously fans aren't used to playing a series in football, whereas Eng/GB v Aus series in RL have a lot of history, but I'm just trying to illustrate the point that winning a series against the team considered to be the best in the world, isn't always what people want most.

Furthermore, for England to win a RL world cup, we'd probably (judging by many of the previous tournaments - 2000, 2008, 2013), have to beat NZ and then Australia - who are often the 2nd and 1st best teams in the world. In a way, that's like winning a three match series, because we would have won two games (albeit against two different teams, but you get the point).

Personally speaking, I'm not really sure what I'd prefer to win. I think probably the World Cup, just because of the prestige that the world cup has in a range of sports. For four years we would be world champions, and I'd like to think we'd remind you often about it. That said, I can perfectly understand why Australian fans would think differently, because you've won 9 out of the last 10 of them (or whatever it is).

[17 stone giant]

I'm thinking only as a tournament to be played in the southern hemisphere, but would a six nations tournament with everyone playing everyone just once (basically like the rugby union six nations) work?

I was thinking maybe Australia, New Zealand, Tonga, PNG, England, and France, so five matches for each team. Like the RU version it would be three matches each weekend for five weekends. The other four teams would play at home (Tonga's home being Auckland) against England and France, and then you'd work out the rest from there on. England against France would either be played at a neutral venue, or perhaps could be played in either England or France, before both teams headed down under.

I don't know if such a tournament would be too much, but I just thought it might work in the southern hemisphere because you're splitting the games over three countries, with Tonga in Auckland almost making up a fourth location.

When it comes to a tournament in the northern hemisphere, I'd maybe leave it at just the four nations (Eng, Fra, Aus, NZ), because I think that's probably more realistic in terms of getting decent crowds for matches split between England and France. That said, I suppose you could make it the same six, but have some of the games (e.g. Tonga v PNG) played in the southern hemisphere, before they travelled over.

I'd possibly also consider making one or two of the spaces in the tournament subject to winning a qualification match/tournament. However, if the tournament for getting a space was, say, France, Scotland, Ireland and Wales, I would only allow those teams to field non-heritage players. I'm not going to allow a France team made up of genuine French players, to lose in qualifying to a Scotland team that is entirely English and Australian. You either qualify with genuine players or not at all.

[17 stone giant]

11 hours ago, The Future is League said:

OK i know my opinion is not worth as much as other's on here, but in my opinion the biggest honour i team sport is to play for your country. Not a city, not a city suburb or state but your country

Generally speaking, I'd agree with you, but I think it does depend on the circumstances. For example, would an Australian rather win one cap (or whatever you call it) for Queensland in an origin match, or one cap for the Kangaroos against Russia (I picked them because I just happened to be looking on Wikipedia and saw that they both played at the 2000 world cup, and Australia won 110-4). I know it's a bit of a freak example, but I reckon probably more would go for the origin game than the Russia game. I could be wrong, though - I mean, to say that you've been a Kangaroo - even just once - is pretty damn special.

[rlno1]

The 4 Nations should be played half way between each World Cup, like the European Championship in football is played at the half way between WC's. It can evolve as it did from 3 teams to 4.

Why can't Australia talk up both origin and tests, why does one have to compare and be belittled. Other sports manage to get by with different tournaments and leagues without the constant one is better then the other BS.

[17 stone giant]

I do also love The Ashes, though, and I believe that it must also return.

As such, here is my new eight year international cycle:

2020	ashes north
2021	world cup north
2022	4/6 nations south
2023	ashes south
2024	ashes north
2025	world cup south
2026	4/6 nations north
2027	ashes south

Unfortunately, to make it fit with things being on a four year cycle, and to avoid matches too many years in a row being in only one of the hemispheres, I had to put the two Ashes series close together. However, the brilliance of this plan is that IF we win (and we're most likely to do so in a home series), we'll be reigning Ashes holders for three whole years. Whereas, if the Aussies win (which they surely will do at home), they'll only be able to hold them for one year, before we hopefully win them back again.

[17 stone giant]

5 minutes ago, rlno1 said:

The 4 Nations should be played half way between each World Cup, like the European Championship in football is played at the half way between WC's. It can evolve as it did from 3 teams to 4.

OK, I've listened to your idea and changed my international schedule as a consequence. They lasted about as long as the real international plans do in RL.

I've now got:

2020	ashes north
2021	world cup north
2022	ashes south
2023	4/6 nations south
2024	ashes north
2025	world cup south
2026	ashes south
2027	4/6 nations north
	repeat

[17 stone giant]

Aagh, the problem with my latest schedule is that it now has matches in the north three years in a row - 2027 4/6 nations north, 2028 ashes north, 2029 world cup north. That's what I was trying to avoid in my first schedule, hence why I originally put The Ashes series together. The Aussies won't want to come over three years in a row. This international scheduling is harder than I realised!

[Getmefood]

The touted Confederations Cup sounded good. Australia, England, New Zealand are auto qualifiers. Winners from European, Pacific, Americas, Middle East/Africa Championships, expanding on the original Four Nations. The Four Nations concept was interesting and did give genuine international RL competition to look forward to at the end of the year. Lets hope the RLIF either bring it back or expand on it..