DoubleD Posted November 21, 2019 Share Posted November 21, 2019 36 minutes ago, Man of Kent said: Best bits here https://philcaplan.wordpress.com/2019/11/21/international-rugby-league-is-the-great-unlocked-potential-in-sport/amp/?__twitter_impression=true Doesn’t reveal a lot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted November 21, 2019 Share Posted November 21, 2019 I’ve got a lot of time for Michael Carbone and his podcasts but I felt the interview with Nigel Wood was a disappointment. I know Wood can’t give details of potential commercial deals but it was bland and full of buzzwords and phrases with little of substance, not inspiring at all. Why can’t he at least say which countries have expressed an interest in hosting the 2025 World Cup, as would happen with any other major sport. Sadly I suspect the answer is none. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nadera78 Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 Most of us on here have been listening to Nigel Wood say a lot without ever actually saying anything for 20 years now. "Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart." Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lounge Room Lizard Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 10 hours ago, Eddie said: I’ve got a lot of time for Michael Carbone and his podcasts but I felt the interview with Nigel Wood was a disappointment. I know Wood can’t give details of potential commercial deals but it was bland and full of buzzwords and phrases with little of substance, not inspiring at all. Why can’t he at least say which countries have expressed an interest in hosting the 2025 World Cup, as would happen with any other major sport. Sadly I suspect the answer is none. The questions were there but no doubt Wood as usual didnt answer them or talked in riddles as he is famous for. This interview showed once again Wood is not a straight talker or one that fills me with much confidence as a leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iangidds Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 1 hour ago, Lounge Room Lizard said: The questions were there but no doubt Wood as usual didnt answer them or talked in riddles as he is famous for. This interview showed once again Wood is not a straight talker or one that fills me with much confidence as a leader. It’s all just bluff and bluster, he’s had decades to put the game in a good position and has failed miserably! It’s time he crawled under a large rock and counted the cash he has acquired from our game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLegendOfTexEvans Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 On 21/11/2019 at 21:40, Eddie said: I’ve got a lot of time for Michael Carbone and his podcasts but I felt the interview with Nigel Wood was a disappointment. I know Wood can’t give details of potential commercial deals but it was bland and full of buzzwords and phrases with little of substance, not inspiring at all. Why can’t he at least say which countries have expressed an interest in hosting the 2025 World Cup, as would happen with any other major sport. Sadly I suspect the answer is none. Massive mistake in my opinion becoming an official podcast. If you going to offer an impartial view of anything you need to be independent, if you want to people to trust your reporting. A lot of the opinion he offers is ill informed and unless you are boots on the ground better not to push other peoples opinions around. Your run the risk of become propaganda for manipulative people. Better to stick to reporting the bare facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted November 23, 2019 Author Share Posted November 23, 2019 I agree with the above comments that he says a lot without saying much at all. Perhaps the 2 most interesting things was that they "wanted to operate in 2 new G7 countries". This seemed to imply France and the USA going forward whilst not the most ambitious was probably the most realistic. Secondly was that there was an aim to have 8 nations able to realistically win the World cup. Who would we think that would be now going forward? Australia, New Zealand, England, Tonga??? I don't see how the IRL is actively bringing any other nations up to standard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pulga Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 2 hours ago, Tommygilf said: I agree with the above comments that he says a lot without saying much at all. Perhaps the 2 most interesting things was that they "wanted to operate in 2 new G7 countries". This seemed to imply France and the USA going forward whilst not the most ambitious was probably the most realistic. Secondly was that there was an aim to have 8 nations able to realistically win the World cup. Who would we think that would be now going forward? Australia, New Zealand, England, Tonga??? I don't see how the IRL is actively bringing any other nations up to standard? Well if you think England have a realistic chance then you have to include PNG and Fiji at minimum. Samoa at a stretch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted November 23, 2019 Author Share Posted November 23, 2019 11 minutes ago, Pulga said: Well if you think England have a realistic chance then you have to include PNG and Fiji at minimum. Samoa at a stretch. I don't think so. For England its a home world cup which is a huge advantage. And PNG in PNG vs PNG anywhere else is almost like playing 2 different sides - that is something they really have to work on to show progression. Fiji definitely have the potential to get into that group of top nations, but how are the IRL actually helping them to do that as per the IRL's stated vision? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pulga Posted November 24, 2019 Share Posted November 24, 2019 8 hours ago, Tommygilf said: I don't think so. For England its a home world cup which is a huge advantage. And PNG in PNG vs PNG anywhere else is almost like playing 2 different sides - that is something they really have to work on to show progression. Fiji definitely have the potential to get into that group of top nations, but how are the IRL actually helping them to do that as per the IRL's stated vision? That is true for PNG. It will be interesting to see their next few games against the higher ranking opponents. Fiji is moving up to the A group in the Pacific Championship aren't they? That should help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted November 24, 2019 Author Share Posted November 24, 2019 59 minutes ago, Pulga said: That is true for PNG. It will be interesting to see their next few games against the higher ranking opponents. Fiji is moving up to the A group in the Pacific Championship aren't they? That should help. Yes but in reality that means next year they've got 1 test against Tonga and 1 against New Zealand - and maybe 1 extra against an as yet unannounced opponent for the rep weekend. The impact of which is going to be inevitably limited by the fact it is just 2 or 3 games and the fact that by them getting those 2 games, another nation like PNG is missing out - just as was the issue with the 4 nations. I'm thinking more how is the IRL putting in place the scope for the sides attempting to get to that top table - the Oceania Cup was almost certainly not their idea (as you'd assume it would have been mirrored in the northern hemisphere if it was). How are teams that aren't Oz or NZ being encouraged to tour or play series against eachother. Perhaps if Fiji, Tonga, Samoa and PNG came to the Northern hemisphere to tour a selection of the teams up here we'd see a greater emphasis placed on representing them and encourage reciprocal tours by the northern hemisphere sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pulga Posted November 24, 2019 Share Posted November 24, 2019 3 hours ago, Tommygilf said: Yes but in reality that means next year they've got 1 test against Tonga and 1 against New Zealand - and maybe 1 extra against an as yet unannounced opponent for the rep weekend. The impact of which is going to be inevitably limited by the fact it is just 2 or 3 games and the fact that by them getting those 2 games, another nation like PNG is missing out - just as was the issue with the 4 nations. I'm thinking more how is the IRL putting in place the scope for the sides attempting to get to that top table - the Oceania Cup was almost certainly not their idea (as you'd assume it would have been mirrored in the northern hemisphere if it was). How are teams that aren't Oz or NZ being encouraged to tour or play series against eachother. Perhaps if Fiji, Tonga, Samoa and PNG came to the Northern hemisphere to tour a selection of the teams up here we'd see a greater emphasis placed on representing them and encourage reciprocal tours by the northern hemisphere sides. The IRL doesn't organise most test matches. They only have their finger in some tournaments. The onus is on the nations themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted November 24, 2019 Author Share Posted November 24, 2019 5 hours ago, Pulga said: The IRL doesn't organise most test matches. They only have their finger in some tournaments. The onus is on the nations themselves. I understand that but with largely amateur federations outside that top echelon surely the IRL could act as a mediator between nations that want to tour and potential destinations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.