Where do we think Rugby League will be in 5 years time?

[Clogiron]

1 hour ago, langpark said:

The beauty of the term 'coconut' was that it would include the NZ maoris along with the pacific islanders.  No other term can do that, not 'pacific islanders', nor 'polynesians'.  But yeah, it's not a word I would use if I didn't know the person well enough.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand, I do agree with you, the rise of these pacific nations, a large percentage of it has been down to luck and also, let's not forget the Jason Taumalolo defection, which single-handedly changed the face of RLWC2017 and arguably international RL as a whole.

I do give the Aussies credit for being more accommodating recently, with PNG Hunters in the Qld Cup and the Fiji team joining the NSW system, for example.  But so many Aussies just cannot grasp the sheer size of Europe, compared to Oceania.  Here are a few raw facts;

Australia and PNG (two countries where RL is (almost) the top sport) have a combined population of 33 million.  Which is 80% of the entire Oceania population (41.5 million).

England, or more specifically Lancashire, Yorkshire, Cumbria (where RL is more popular, but still not top sport) has a combined population of 7.5 million, out of 73 million (UK & Ireland), just over 10%.

So obviously, it's much easier for the 'fish in the puddle' than the 'little fish in the ocean'.

That's a interesting way of looking at things, I would think it's more European's who don't grasp the size of Australasia, to to talk of a Queensland derby or the size of some of the areas that make up the group competition's in the same way as discussing Wigan V Saint's or the Pennine league is incomprehensible. For number's we are compact but for distance we baulk at a away game in Cumberland.  How many miles would a NRL team cover (much of it by air) during a season?

 

[Big Picture]

It happens that Tony Collins and Sean McGuire discussed the game's post-Covid future earlier in the year.

 

[langpark]

33 minutes ago, Clogiron said:

That's a interesting way of looking at things, I would think it's more European's who don't grasp the size of Australasia, to to talk of a Queensland derby or the size of some of the areas that make up the group competition's in the same way as discussing Wigan V Saint's or the Pennine league is incomprehensible. For number's we are compact but for distance we baulk at a away game in Cumberland.  How many miles would a NRL team cover (much of it by air) during a season?

True but how is that relevant to anything? We want to increase the size of our sport (size: playong numbers, TV viewers, fans etc.) Not sure what the distances have to do with any of that. 

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

7 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

It was me that brought it up in response to the criticism of a possible exiles game , as essentially that is what it is , and of course the use of Netball as a forward thinking sport , they do it = good , we do it = bad 

I agree

I think we keep the Exiles as a fixture, I've been to loads of the games and will again

[Oxford]

35 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

It happens that Tony Collins and Sean McGuire discussed the game's post-Covid future earlier in the year.

We're all really guessing and playing pundit with the future which mostly depends on the mood we're in when we comment or post. All I'm saying here is that their assessment mabe as loaded or as silly as ours.

Do you recall what they said that seemed useful?

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

6 hours ago, The Rocket said:

 

If all tackles are below the waist we might just see more head clashes as tacklers go in.

If the goal is to eliminate all concussions I think they are going to have to find a different way. Professional players may have to sign waivers.

Thats come up in the argument 

I think stats show more concussions are caused by above waist tackles than below 

In addition I'd guess (my opinion no science) ...... 

Union injuries happen in the breakdown - dangerous clearing out etc

League - 10m rule means higher speed impact.... And obviuosly a LOT more tackles in a game

Unfortunately both the above are the respective essences of each code

Not sure what the answer is

[Oldbear]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but from far away it seems that a lot of the Pacific Island success seems to come from simple economics, in that young Pacific Islanders leave their homes to find work in Australia, they have families and their kids learn the game through the Aussie system. This will probably continue as Islanders will seek a better life in Aus, and the players are a by product of this, rather than any grand NRL plan.

[Big Picture]

1 hour ago, Oxford said:

We're all really guessing and playing pundit with the future which mostly depends on the mood we're in when we comment or post. All I'm saying here is that their assessment maybe as loaded or as silly as ours.

Do you recall what they said that seemed useful?

I daresay that a historian of the game and the former CEO of a top pro club have a lot better insight into the game's challenges and obstacles than most.  McGuire was pretty shocked by the idea that the game had sunk so low as to need a loan to keep afloat after the previous so-called "golden decade", and he thought that 16 million £ was hardly anything in the grand scheme of things.  Everyone here really should listen to the interviews he did with Tony Collins, they'd learn some hard truths about where the game sits in the UK.

[Oxford]

33 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

I daresay that a historian of the game and the former CEO of a top pro club have a lot better insight into the game's challenges and obstacles than most.

They'll have certain knowledge and facts but the future is something else entirely.

[Oxford]

17 minutes ago, Oxford said:

They'll have certain knowledge and facts but the future is something else entirely.

And this may just be the start

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/55766086

"Rugby league's community clubs face fight for survival in lockdown"

[Oldbear]

I guess the question is does the game as a whole have a 5 year plan looking forwards? You know like most forward thinking businesses. I suspect not, which is worrying, by the same token I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the more forward thinking clubs do have a plan (I’m thinking Leeds, Saints, Warrington, York, maybe a couple of others who might surprise a few individuals). You know the old saying, “failing to plan is planning to fail”. I know COVID will have wrecked many business plans but let’s be honest, pre COVID the game seemed to be marking time, relying on the next World Cup to provide something. Instead the game’s administration should be planning how to use the momentum of the World Cup to move the game forward, but are they?

[Big Picture]

5 minutes ago, Oxford said:

And this may just be the start

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/55766086

"Rugby league's community clubs face fight for survival in lockdown"

The statement, "And club volunteers in some of the country's most deprived communities fear it could be a devastating blow to the health and welfare of a generation of youngsters, particularly across the north of England heartlands" is right in line with what Tony Collins and Sean McGuire have discussed in their interviews: the game's unhealthy dependence on areas and towns which are economically disadvantaged/deprived.

[Oxford]

1 minute ago, Oldbear said:

I guess the question is does the game as a whole have a 5 year plan looking forwards? You know like most forward thinking businesses.

I think the situation will take well run, forward looking and diversified businesses along with it. The only real difference will be how near their cash flow is to uesless.

 

[Oxford]

7 minutes ago, Oldbear said:

Instead the game’s administration should be planning how to use the momentum of the World Cup to move the game forward, but are they?

Using the momentum of a World Cup would be useful but the situation coming means we'll be lucky to have a game to aspire to.

The thing about the health & welfare of a generation is hardly the stuff of legendary insight though.

[Oldbear]

8 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

And Harry , how far will the heretige rules be stretched , in 2 more generations how many actual Tongans,Samoans,Fijians will there be who can claim it ?

I guess that depends on the flow of Pacific Islanders who move to Aus in search of a better life and work. Their kids are then born and grow up in Aus, and play the game in Aussie junior comps, some make it all the way. But that’s hardly Australia helping develop the game, it’s just them sitting back and taking advantage of economics, so I’m not sure how much credit they can claim. We don’t have that luxury.

[THE RED ROOSTER]

In Australasia the game will go from strength to strength. The NRL will remian a vibrant competition in the Eastern States and International League between Aus, NZ and the Pacific Islands will gain in credibility albiet that all sides will be drawn from NRL clubs.

In the Northern Hemisphere, the game will have contracted in on itself only about six clubs will not be part-time and those youngsters who opt for league over other sports will either migrate to Union or the NRL at an early age. Money in the game will be even less than today and the lament on TRL will be that the game has gone back to circa 1991 without the star names that were around then.

The most damaging consequence of the decline in the northgern hemisphere will be the fuelling of voices down under who point out its a "secondary" game in the UK and the NRL could do an AFL and stay an Aussie sport with a poynesian twist. A view that may gian increasing traction.

[Oldbear]

16 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

The statement, "And club volunteers in some of the country's most deprived communities fear it could be a devastating blow to the health and welfare of a generation of youngsters, particularly across the north of England heartlands" is right in line with what Tony Collins and Sean McGuire have discussed in their interviews: the game's unhealthy dependence on areas and towns which are economically disadvantaged/deprived.

The majority of sports have traditionally found their players from economically deprived communities as a career as a pro athlete offers the chance to escape poverty and change lives for ever. Where RL has fallen behind is that firstly the pro clubs are also located in economically deprived towns and cities, plus those same clubs have been unable to attract outside investment and sponsorship because the game itself is too low profile and hidden away on some satellite subscription channel. By NFL standards, Buffalo and Cleveland are hardly economic powerhouse cities, but that doesn’t matter because those teams are able to reach way outside those cities due to being part of a truly big league. RL’s challenge is that it’s not a high profile sport, and sadly is never likely to be, therefore it needs to plan carefully how it intends to survive in the future otherwise it may just end up contracting to 12, nominally pro clubs (but feeders for the NRL), with very little below.

[GUBRATS]

11 minutes ago, THE RED ROOSTER said:

In Australasia the game will go from strength to strength. The NRL will remian a vibrant competition in the Eastern States and International League between Aus, NZ and the Pacific Islands will gain in credibility albiet that all sides will be drawn from NRL clubs.

In the Northern Hemisphere, the game will have contracted in on itself only about six clubs will not be part-time and those youngsters who opt for league over other sports will either migrate to Union or the NRL at an early age. Money in the game will be even less than today and the lament on TRL will be that the game has gone back to circa 1991 without the star names that were around then.

The most damaging consequence of the decline in the northgern hemisphere will be the fuelling of voices down under who point out its a "secondary" game in the UK and the NRL could do an AFL and stay an Aussie sport with a poynesian twist. A view that may gian increasing traction.

Woe , woe and thrice woe

[Oldbear]

5 minutes ago, THE RED ROOSTER said:

In Australasia the game will go from strength to strength. The NRL will remian a vibrant competition in the Eastern States and International League between Aus, NZ and the Pacific Islands will gain in credibility albiet that all sides will be drawn from NRL clubs.

In the Northern Hemisphere, the game will have contracted in on itself only about six clubs will not be part-time and those youngsters who opt for league over other sports will either migrate to Union or the NRL at an early age. Money in the game will be even less than today and the lament on TRL will be that the game has gone back to circa 1991 without the star names that were around then.

The most damaging consequence of the decline in the northgern hemisphere will be the fuelling of voices down under who point out its a "secondary" game in the UK and the NRL could do an AFL and stay an Aussie sport with a poynesian twist. A view that may gian increasing traction.

I really hope this is not the case but I fear you may be right. I suspect that the NRL may end up becoming AFL like in that it’s seen as solely an antipodean sport, and that the presence of British born players in the NRL will be the only reminder to the average Aussie that there is even a game in the Northern hemisphere. I think a 12 club SL will still exist in the Northern hemisphere but in order to keep those clubs fully professional all of the TV money will go their way, so there will be very little below those 12, perhaps a slimmed down community game with a sole role of providing young players to the SL clubs, who in turn will resign themselves to each losing 3-4 players per year to either the NRL or Union. Of course in that scenario we could end up with a bizarre world where internationals involving England could still take place, but only ever being played in Australia, since all the top England qualified players will already be there, and the Aussies could run a World Cup where every player involved plays in the NRL.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

28 minutes ago, THE RED ROOSTER said:

In Australasia the game will go from strength to strength. The NRL will remian a vibrant competition in the Eastern States and International League between Aus, NZ and the Pacific Islands will gain in credibility albiet that all sides will be drawn from NRL clubs.

In the Northern Hemisphere, the game will have contracted in on itself only about six clubs will not be part-time and those youngsters who opt for league over other sports will either migrate to Union or the NRL at an early age. Money in the game will be even less than today and the lament on TRL will be that the game has gone back to circa 1991 without the star names that were around then.

The most damaging consequence of the decline in the northgern hemisphere will be the fuelling of voices down under who point out its a "secondary" game in the UK and the NRL could do an AFL and stay an Aussie sport with a poynesian twist. A view that may gian increasing traction.

You've been reading this forum too much chap and it's given you a negative slant

Reports of our games demise have always been greatly exaggerated 

 

[langpark]

3 hours ago, Oldbear said:

I guess that depends on the flow of Pacific Islanders who move to Aus in search of a better life and work. Their kids are then born and grow up in Aus, and play the game in Aussie junior comps, some make it all the way. But that’s hardly Australia helping develop the game, it’s just them sitting back and taking advantage of economics, so I’m not sure how much credit they can claim. We don’t have that luxury.

I think pacific island migration, towards NZ and Australia will steadily continue for years to come, so I don't think their heritage stocks will ever dry up.  A bit like Welsh, Scottish and Irish migration to England.

[The Rocket]

9 hours ago, langpark said:

Anyway, back to the topic at hand, I do agree with you, the rise of these pacific nations, a large percentage of it has been down to luck and also, let's not forget the Jason Taumalolo defection, which single-handedly changed the face of RLWC2017 and arguably international RL as a whole.

 

5 hours ago, Oldbear said:

Correct me if I’m wrong, but from far away it seems that a lot of the Pacific Island success seems to come from simple economics, in that young Pacific Islanders leave their homes to find work in Australia, they have families and their kids learn the game through the Aussie system. This will probably continue as Islanders will seek a better life in Aus, and the players are a by product of this, rather than any grand NRL plan.

Let`s look at this another way. The Pacific Cup tests have been played since 1974, yes sporadically and probably with a varying deal of commitment from Australian and the IRL, but nonetheless played. And through an era when a lot more union was played in the Pacific Islands than Rugby League.

Now for us in our `white` bubble those game passed largely unnoticed or were ignored but probably not by those involved and their communities. I can recall quite distinctly matches played between Pacific Island Nations being played 20 years ago and the passion they engendered as to who could claim to be on top of the Rugby League tree amongst Pacific Island nations. These games were almost seen as SOO affairs with their passion and ferocity. And there was some classic matches.

Now once again these games weren`t televised, I don`t think were called on radio, only score updates and received scant newspaper coverage, however they did attract healthy crowds and I have little doubt that they were big news in those Islander communities, certainly in Australia. So in its` own way the notion of Pacific Nations teams and rivalries was being fostered. Perhaps even being fostered in those communities to a point where a time came when some young Pacific Islanders have said I want to represent my home nation, the nation of my forebears. And maybe that is where we stand today.

So is it totally unreasonable to say that todays current situation is the culmination of 50 years of Pacific Cup Tests, 50 years of those teams being around, certainly invisible to us but maybe not to them.

Another thing that I think is worth mentioning that as far as I can remember whenever we have had an especially high profile player of Islander heritage the League has been pretty quick to get these blokes back over to their home nation and have tournaments and competitions named after them and basically use their profile to spread the word. Petro Civoniceva, Jarryd Hayne perhaps were used in this manner. So this hasn`t just basically fallen in the NRL`s lap, and we must concede that immigration and these communities love of contact sports has been integral.

[langpark]

Some good points that you bring up there Rocket.  I don't want to "###### for tat" with you on that last paragraph, but let's not forget how ruthless the Aussies (and other tier one nations) can be when they want to be.  The way they swooped in like vultures for Semi Radradra, depriving Fiji Bati of his services, I thought was disgraceful.  I know it's a bit unfair to blame a whole country for this, as it could literally have been down to one coach, but it wasn't exactly an isolated incident either.

Now these old test matches you speak of, I don't know anything about them, please tell me more.  I suppose my main question is this:  if those matches were, Tonga vs Samoa, for example, what exactly was Australia's role in those matches?

Personally, for me it's about 50-50.  50% pure luck with the migration, 50% has been from their initiatives.

 

[The Rocket]

1 hour ago, langpark said:

Some good points that you bring up there Rocket.  I don't want to "###### for tat" with you on that last paragraph, but let's not forget how ruthless the Aussies (and other tier one nations) can be when they want to be.  The way they swooped in like vultures for Semi Radradra, depriving Fiji Bati of his services, I thought was disgraceful.  I know it's a bit unfair to blame a whole country for this, as it could literally have been down to one coach, but it wasn't exactly an isolated incident either.

Now these old test matches you speak of, I don't know anything about them, please tell me more.  I suppose my main question is this:  if those matches were, Tonga vs Samoa, for example, what exactly was Australia's role in those matches?

Personally, for me it's about 50-50.  50% pure luck with the migration, 50% has been from their initiatives.

 

You`re dead right with regards your first point , coaches don`t want to have a loss next to their name and will get the best players and anyone else can be damned.

The real test for me and the proof that their really serious is when all international players get equal or at least more equal appearance money, especially given that both sides contribute to the spectacle. Even if that means the Aussies get less, why should we rely on these young blokes putting up their hands for Tonga, Cook Islands et. al. and doing it for their country while the Aussies get 10 000 per game and do it for their country. I`m a little bit disappointed this issue hasn`t been addressed, perhaps the authorities are frightened of the consequences. There might be a real shake out of the international pecking order if the real young gun players started putting up their hands for elsewhere, say a Kotoni Staggs chooses Tonga first.

We have been happy to make these grandparent`s birth place eligibility rules but until we back it up with cash we`re still having a bet both ways or covering our ar$es because we often know a young bloke will take the cash first, he doesn`t know how long his career will last.

The history of the Pacific Cup goes back to the 1970`s when there was two tournaments arranged by the NSWRL, it was postponed then until the mid-80`s when the rise of Rugby League competitions in Pacific island nations saw its` revival. Still done under the auspices of either the NSWRL or NZRL. There`s a couple of good sites on-line: 

* 2009 Pacific Cup History - NRL

* Pacific Cup.  Wikipedia

* Samoa vs. Tonga in Rugby League

* Rugby League Samoa - Our History - RL Samoa.

These articles touch on all the nations that played and gives an insight into what was quite a rivalry. Even if unbeknown to us.

[Getmefood]

On 22/01/2021 at 09:43, Oldbear said:

With all the talk about league structures, P&R v licensing, Private Equity, NRL involvement etc, I wonder what people here think about where the game of Rugby League will be in 5 years time? I’m not a doom and gloom guy so there’s no way I think the games is going to die, but on the other hand I do think that the next 5 years, and the decisions taken by the games leaders, will decide what kind of long term future we will see. So over to you forum members, where do you think the game will be in 5 years time, the same number of pro clubs, fewer or an increase? Will we end up becoming just a feeder league to RU/NRL? Will the sport retreat to the heartlands, will French clubs still be in the British structure? Is expansion over? If not then where will be the next expansion area? What about the amateur game, can the fall in playing numbers be reversed?

Overto you.

With the current situations happening around the world not much will change. I'd love to see France ONE DAY have full strength Catalans and Toulouse competing in their own French league. Ottawa looks like they are still active on twitter so may have 2022 in sight. Once coronavirus has fully healed I can see a brighter future for rugby league as long as the sport is maintained. Hoping the WC can get a good outcome whether it happens this year or next..