Jump to content

International RL Eligibility - Update


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Eddie said:

You are fond of putting words into people’s mouths aren’t you. Can’t you understand the different between a second generation Tongan in Australia with two parents born in Tonga, and an English bloke with one Scottish grandparent? 

The grandparent rule should be scrapped.  World wide.  Residency rules are a joke as well.

Why do we have them?  Because promoters, TV companies, advertisers, national organisations all want to big up their competitions and make money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The thing about looking at who might qualify is the discussion  always ends up with the same arguments and they always end up at the same point.

It's another example of the two armed camps that haunt more or less all debate.

The feelings and connections of the players don't seem to be very important on one side at least.

I think we are as unforgiving, unrepentent and as repetitive as a funeral insurance advert.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

The grandparent rule should be scrapped.  World wide.  Residency rules are a joke as well.

Why do we have them?  Because promoters, TV companies, advertisers, national organisations all want to big up their competitions and make money.

I completely disagree, thankfully so does everyone that matters across all sports.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not believe grandparent rule should be scrapped nor do I agree with some other extreme suggestions here. Without the grandparent rule, we could not have an 8-team World Cup let alone 16. But what we are currently seeing is the other extreme. 

There should be measures taken (and also incentives) to produce more local talent.

I can see this same discussion coming up again in 20 years. And the same people advocating all-heritage teams, will no doubt be scratching their heads wondering why the game has not gone the slightest bit forward in those countries (I hope to be wrong of course). 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

 

I often find the anti-heritage argument to be made most strongly by those with either no connection to any other nation or a very weak one at best - a point most prominent in "middle England" in my experience which is to be expected.

 

This....⬆️⬆️⬆️
 

Couldn’t have put it better.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

The grandparent rule should be scrapped.  World wide.  Residency rules are a joke as well.

Why do we have them?  Because promoters, TV companies, advertisers, national organisations all want to big up their competitions and make money.

The utter b'stards!

  • Like 1

"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

7 hours ago, Eddie said:

I agree with a lot of what you say, in the historic sense, although people going to see Celtic and Hibs doesn’t really apply here in my opinion, nor does Irish Nationalism in 1920’s Liverpool. All I am saying is that someone who is English with one Scottish grandparent and who has never been to Scotland, isn’t Scottish, and I think having a team full of people like that devalues their national RL team. If you disagree that’s fine. 
 

Also with regards to the comment above, if you’re implying that I’m from middle England with no connection to any other nation you’re way off the mark. Only 2 of my great grandparents were English, and I think one of them had Scottish parents, and I also have two Polish (born there) grandparents. 

My point is that it demonstrates how migratory communities change over time and what links people now to their family and their pasts isn't constant. If you'd have walked around 1910s Liverpool you'd have said Irish patriotism was as vibrant if not more so than Tongans in Sydney or Auckland now. Things change, and equally its possible to feel more than one nationality. I always put "British" down as my nationality/ethnicity for example as "English" doesn't really cover it for me. Likewise I know people from migrant communities who outright reject their country of birth or parental heritage as a matter of principle. Its all fine, as it should be individual choice.

I wasn't making a comment on you personally apologies if it came across that way.

I think heritage players are far more legitimate than residency players, of whom many populate t'other codes national sides. Given the nature of the UK being one country split into 4 for sporting purposes too makes those teams especially liable for heritage players given the predominance of England within the UK.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

No one from England seemed to care when a team of South Africans wearing the three lions won the Ashes.

I think too many people get hung up on the heritage thing. Usually older people, less so the kids who will be the fans of the future.

There should be a sticky on this, as this same lazy comparison gets trotted out everytime on this. Only surprised you didn’t use the Ireland football team as the comparison.

To clarify matters, again:

Heritage players are not a problem, heritage teams are.

An England cricket team with two (or three) non English players is no issue, as the backbone is English, the English public can identify with them, and the sport has a significant profile in England (the home of the sport), likewise Big Jacks Ireland wasn’t an issue when we had four non Irish players in our best XI to play alongside Bonner, Irwin, Staunton, Moran, McGrath, Keane, Quinn, we identified with them (also with O’Leary scoring the winning pen in Italia ‘90), and the sport has a significant profile here (the biggest in the country).

Two requirements are needed for an authentic national team, #1. That the sport has a presence/profile in the country. #2. The backbone of the team is native. With no profile (among the public, the media etc.) there will be no coverage, and with no native player there is nobody for the public to identify with. With no natives the cameras or fans cannot turn up to X player’s local town to celebrate their local hero. There’s nothing for the media or the public to grab on to. A heritage team is just a faceless, nomadic outfit with no identity. They could be wearing any teams national colours. Such a set up has generated next to zero interest in Ireland (and it also appears to be the case in Scotland who did similar).

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

I guess you must have missed the last Rugby League World Cup. Take a look at some of Tonga’s games from that.

Our International eligibility rules are very similar to every other sport, we have no need to add fury restrictions and criteria, if you qualify to represent a Nation and you are good enough to get picked that’s enough. 

Tonga is a tiny island with a population that could fit inside the Nou Camp, and the sport already has a profile there. Anything remotely Tonga related makes waves there.

Plus (not that this matters in terms of generating profile) those players feel Tongan, and playing for Tonga is their first choice (fella that rejected NZ for them). No Aussie or Englishman is going to reject Australia or England for Ireland or Scotland. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not into the grandparents rule (parents fine) and think that the residency rule is far too easily exploited, sorry. I was in a lift share with a couple of Welsh blokes in 2013 where they were taking the pee out of the RL world cup, saying that every player they heard interviewed had either a northern England or Australian accent, no matter which country that they represented. That obviously isn't true of every player who was in the tournament, but there's too much of that and it's not a good look for the competition.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say, I don't know much about what other sports are doing, but I think we have gotten the residency rule right ever since it was increased to 5 years, a few years back.

The only player from last WC that I can think of, that qualified on residency was Australian Mark Kheirallah, playing for France.  3 years was too little and prone to exploitation, a few examples that stick out in my memory:

- Nathan Fien:  Aus -> NZ
- Clint Greenshields:  Aus -> France
- Semi Radradra:  Fiji -> Aus

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 18/02/2021 at 11:07, The Future is League said:

I stand by my comments that there is no value for Rugby League of having teams at the world cup full of heritage players

Are you a mate of Robert Elstone, by any chance?

  • Haha 1

www.twitter.com/flyingking2

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, langpark said:

I have to say, I don't know much about what other sports are doing, but I think we have gotten the residency rule right ever since it was increased to 5 years, a few years back.

The only player from last WC that I can think of, that qualified on residency was Australian Mark Kheirallah, playing for France.  3 years was too little and prone to exploitation, a few examples that stick out in my memory:

- Nathan Fien:  Aus -> NZ
- Clint Greenshields:  Aus -> France
- Semi Radradra:  Fiji -> Aus

I agree that 5 years is a lotbetter than 3 but would push it a couple of years further I think

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 19/02/2021 at 00:40, welshmagpie said:

The Crichton boys will likely opt for Samoa, Walmsley a shoe in for England... so let’s go...

1: Coote

2: Russell

3: Aitken

4: Jake Wardle

5: Graham

6: McLelland

7: Brierley

8: Freebairn (he’s a talent)

9: Hood

10: Kavanagh

11: Hellewell

12: Linnett

13: Bell

-

14: Addy

15: Ferguson

16: Houghton

17: Joe Wardle

... maybe? It’s a bit light on the bench but there’s a lot of options.

How many of these players were born in Scotland?

How many of these players are products of Scottish Rugby League clubs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, langpark said:

I have to say, I don't know much about what other sports are doing, but I think we have gotten the residency rule right ever since it was increased to 5 years, a few years back.

The only player from last WC that I can think of, that qualified on residency was Australian Mark Kheirallah, playing for France.  3 years was too little and prone to exploitation, a few examples that stick out in my memory:

- Nathan Fien:  Aus -> NZ
- Clint Greenshields:  Aus -> France
- Semi Radradra:  Fiji -> Aus

Rhys Curran too FWIW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, The Future is League said:

What were the TV viewing figures in Scotland when they played in the world cup?

What were the figures for promotion of the event?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Future is League said:

That wasn't what i asked

No but it was what I responded FL and if you think these are not related in some way try this.

Nothing says you've no faith or confidence in your sport so much as Playing the Scots home games in England, and nothing screams cba so much as relying on RL fans to turn up.

  • Like 1

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Oxford said:

No but it was what I responded FL and if you think these are not related in some way try this.

Nothing says you've no faith or confidence in your sport so much as Playing the Scots home games in England, and nothing screams cba so much as relying on RL fans to turn up.

Is English your first language? and the reason i ask that is that in the English language you never answer a question with a question.

So you are in favour in a Scottish Rugby League team made up with a vast majority if not all of heritage players in a world cup, so do the TV viewing figures Scotland suggest the Scottish public has any interest in watching them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, The Future is League said:

Is English your first language? and the reason i ask that is that in the English language you never answer a question with a question.

That is not, never has been and never will be a rule of English.

I have responded to your questions and statements that is debate.

The main issue I still have is people who it doesn't include making decisions for everyone else about who they should play for based on their assumptions about the whole matter. I also think that's not where the problem lies for sorting out Scottish RL nor will getting rid of heritage players provide any kind of solutions to any of the questions people raised.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 18/02/2021 at 10:09, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Scotland could really put together a half decent side here. It begs the question why are we not playing an annual European Championships, the last I believe was in 2018. We should have an annual competition similar to the Oceania Cup where whoever finishes bottom in Group A swaps places with the winner of Group B. After the World Cup from 2022 I’d like to see this competition resume with the following groups.

Group A - England Knights, France, Scotland, Ireland 

Group B- Wales, Italy, Greece, Serbia 

If England wont play their proper team then this would be a waste of time. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...