Rugby League World Cup 2021 (Merged Threads)

[GeordieSaint]

3 minutes ago, EastLondonMike said:

Jesus wept.

He no doubt is... outright lies. 

I am now vaccinated 18 months into the pandemic. I have worked every single day in an air conditioned facility. I've travelled overseas numerous times for work (right now in fact), and had both my kids in school/nursery the entire time. Not once tested positive. Absolutely shameless by the NRL/ARLC.

[Davo5]

9 minutes ago, Damien said:

And the spin continues. Let's just completely ignore the fact that organisers offered to vaccinate all players:

 

What a door handle,he hasn’t got a clue.

[EastLondonMike]

3 minutes ago, Damien said:

In 18 months I've not caught Covid. I must be immune or something if its such a certainty 

I'm in despair. This whole RLWC thing has got me. I can't spayk.

Edited July 30, 2021 by EastLondonMike

[Scubby]

When all said and done...

The NRL and NZRL has basically kicked a founding RL nation in the bollcks when it was on its knees. I will never forgive them for that!

[Moove]

Hmm so presumably that means every single person in the UK has already had Covid then right? Cool. Idiots.

[EastLondonMike]

1 minute ago, Scubby said:

When all said and done...

The NRL and NZRL has basically kicked a founding RL nation in the bollcks when it was on its knees. I will never forgive them for that!

Co-sign. The NZRL will come to regret this. All for the promise of (possibly) playing one game a year.

If this whole episode doesn't inspire the RFL/SL to sort the game out nothing will.

[londonrlfan]

7 minutes ago, Damien said:

In 18 months I've not caught Covid. I must be immune or something if its such a certainty 

Me too.

[Cumbrian Fanatic]

36 minutes ago, Keith989 said:

The only thing the NFL is interested in is expanding their tv market. 

That to me is why pulling out of the world cup doesn't make commercial sense.

Australia and New Zealand are finite, and pretty small markets, I would think most people in those countries are already aware of rugby league and therefore if they are not watching its because they are not interested.

Playing in a world cup becomes a showcase for their product to many other countries. 

[The Hallucinating Goose]

5 minutes ago, londonrlfan said:

Me too.

Me three. 

[JM2010]

8 minutes ago, EastLondonMike said:

Co-sign. The NZRL will come to regret this. All for the promise of (possibly) playing one game a year.

If this whole episode doesn't inspire the RFL/SL to sort the game out nothing will.

RL is giving RU a boost because they can use their international game and, RL's lack of it, to entice players to switch codes and encourage kids to choose RU over RL

[Gomersall]

3 hours ago, Mathius Hellwege said:

Australia coach Mal Meninga "heartbroken" over World Cup withdrawal | LoveRugbyLeague

 

poor guy and hero

[GeordieSaint]

24 minutes ago, Damien said:

And the spin continues. Let's just completely ignore the fact that organisers offered to vaccinate all players:

 

Damien, can you see the 'For Roger' tweet below the quoted tweet? If so, would you mind saying something sarcastic along the lines of "Roger would have stayed if we offered him the opportunity to travel etc etc... oh wait #RLWC21"?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

37 minutes ago, londonrlfan said:

Why is RL the only sport obsessed with having every international match decided by golden point? Yes you get hammerings, but they happen in all sports. Spain beat Germany 6-0 in the Nations League, China win the Table Tennis at every Olympics. San Marino have no chance of winning a football match but for them it's an event and an opportunity to play world class players, they're not bothered about losing 13-0. What reason would Welsh players want to play RL if there's no opportunity for them to represent their country? Give them meaningful games against the best players in front of big crowds. 

A few things need addressing here...

1) Fans aren't obsessed with having every international decided by golden point. If you've got to exaggerate this to such a degree, you're already off to a bad start.

Fans want competitive matches. Competitive matches involve the other side having some kind of shot at winning. You can predict the vast majority of international games involving England. In fact, I'd say until recently, it was only games against NZ you weren't sure which way would go. You either knew we'd get beaten by Australia or comfortably beat one of the other sides.

2) Hammerings do happen in other sports. This is not something anyone has denied. It's the frequency and predictability of the hammerings that are the issue. No one predicts Germany stuffing Brazil or Spain stuffing Germany in your big games. These are rare and a story in themselves. If we hammered Australia, it would be completely different story to us hammering France.

3) San Marino have very little chance of winning. That's why they rarely play the top sides. You can't have a San Marino type side play against England in a sport like rugby league; it's not safe.

4) I don't think people are clamouring to watch China vs GB at Table Tennis, it's not a great comparison.

5) I never said Welsh players shouldn't have the opportunity to play against the best. This point seems to be missed. What I have said is it would be harmful to keep having them play the top sides if they are no where near the standard for the sake of playing the top sides.

There is usually little chance that Scottish footballers will be in a WC or Euros, yet they seem to be able to interest players and supporters. They do not need to play the top sides every year. I agree that need the opportunity to, and I suggest a clear system to achieve this rather than "invitationals" or "friendlies" every year. Something that actually means something.

Not everyone can play the top sides all the time. And if they did, they wouldn't be meaningful and certainly wouldn't get big crowds.

Edited July 30, 2021 by Wellsy4HullFC

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

3 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Not everyone can play the top sides all the time. And if they did, they wouldn't be meaningful and certainly wouldn't get big crowds.

The problem we have though is that if we can't rely on NZ, Aus and possibly any teams reliant on NRL players, then what 'top sides' do England actually have to play against? This is my fear going forward that the international game is so contracted that it massively reduces our ability to attract newbies to the sport, both in terms of spectators and inspiring youngsters to play.

[The Hallucinating Goose]

Right that's it, I'm done. It's been a good run, I've enjoyed my time as a hardcore rugby league fan but it's over. 

I've been a season ticket holder since my school days, I've attended so many games I can't remember the vast majority but I do remember that the internationals were some of the very best. I've built up a massive collection of shirts and programmes and ticket stubs and general merchandise which I will always treasure as being such a big part of my life. 

But nope, I'm done with the sport, I can't believe I'd ever find myself saying that but I am quite simply fed up with all the bull sheet that surrounds it. I'm fed up with the constant stress and worry that comes with following this sport.

I follow certain sports to enjoy them and enjoy myself and generally relax and unwind but I am afraid I'm just not enjoying rugby league anymore and one thing I've found in the 18 months I haven't been attending games is I haven't particularly missed going and I havent been that bothered about even following the game. I guess I just casually keep following it out of habit because I always have but I can always find something more satisfying to do like choking myself. 

[iffleyox]

25 minutes ago, Scubby said:

When all said and done...

The NRL and NZRL has basically kicked the founding RL nation in the bollcks when it was on its knees. I will never forgive them for that!

FTFY

[londonrlfan]

2 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

A few things need addressing here...

1) Fans aren't obsessed with having every international decided by golden point. If you've got to exaggerate this to such a degree, you're already off to a bad start.

Fans want competitive matches. Competitive matches involve the other side having some kind of shot at winning. You can predict the vast majority of international games involving England. In fact, I'd say until recently, it was only games against NZ you weren't sure which way would go. You either knew we'd get beaten by Australia or comfortably beat one of the other sides.

2) Hammerings do happen in other sports. This is not something anyone has denied. It's the frequency and predictability of the hammerings that are the issue. No one predicts Germany stuffing Brazil or Spain stuffing Germany in your big games. These are rare and a story in themselves. If we hammered Australia, it would be completely different story to us hammering France.

3) San Marino have very little chance of winning. That's why they rarely play the top sides. You can't have a San Marino type side play against England in a sport like rugby league; it's not safe.

4) I don't think people are clamouring to watch China vs GB at Table Tennis, it's not a great comparison.

5) I never said Welsh players shouldn't have the opportunity to play against the best. This point seems to be missed. What I have said is it would be harmful to keep having them play the top sides if they are no where near the standard for the sake of playing the top sides.

There is usually little chance that Scottish footballers will be in a WC or Euros, yet they seem to be able to interest players and supporters. They do not need to play the top sides every year. I agree that need the opportunity to, and I suggest a clear system to achieve this rather than "invitationals" or "friendlies" every year. Something that actually means something.

I haven't said England should play a team of amateurs. I said no reason why we can't play France, Wales, Jamaica, Scotland and Ireland. These are all made up of SL players, so none of them are amateurs and we don't need the NRL's permission to play them. Plus it makes a nice change to add some variety to the fixture list. 3 test series against NZ all the time are boring and over saturated. 

RL fans are definitely afraid of one sided score lines. But why is it ok for England to take a hammering but not Wales or France? 

My point about San Marino is they are happy to face the best players in the world, even though they have no chance of winning. I'm sure the USA for example would love to play against England RL, even though they wouldn't win. It gives them an opportunity to play against the best RL players in the world. I'm sure GB's table tennis players would love to face China at the Olympics. Same with British tennis players playing Djokovic on Centre Court at Wimbledon. They won't win, but it's all about the experience. The opportunity has to be there. 

[Wellsy4HullFC]

35 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

But again, you have no nations that England can compete with now Australia and NZ gave us the finger and if people can´t see what that dependency has done , they never will. 

If we can get a team over to take part in a 4 nations comp from Oceania (a PNG or Samoa) great but we have to start to build are own comps. And if players knew that Wales were going to play 3 games a year with a chance to go to a final, people are more likely to declare eligibility . 

Fact is, we tried it your way with France Wales and Ireland playing a Euro comp and no sponsor or tv company cares because England aren´t in it. 

I never said we shouldn't play them. How many times do I need to state this fact?

The frequency of which people are suggesting I feel would be damaging to the development of international rugby league and those nations.

No TV company or sponsors will be interested for a while, with or without England.

[londonrlfan]

1 minute ago, ShropshireBull said:

So thats where we disagree.  I think a fta channel would happily take a 4 nations tournament.  

Plus again, if England arent playing them regularly who are they playing  (because it aint Australia and NZ anymore) ?

Combined Nations All Stars obviously!

[londonrlfan]

When was the last time a tournament involving England wasn't shown on TV?

[londonrlfan]

England v Ireland in 2013 got 24k sell out and 1m viewers on BBC, England v Scotland in 2016 got 20k and 1.6m viewers on BBC. Why do some RL fans still believe fans only want to watch NZ and Australia? 

[Wellsy4HullFC]

21 minutes ago, londonrlfan said:

I haven't said England should play a team of amateurs. I said no reason why we can't play France, Wales, Jamaica, Scotland and Ireland. These are all made up of SL players, so none of them are amateurs and we don't need the NRL's permission to play them. Plus it makes a nice change to add some variety to the fixture list. 3 test series against NZ all the time are boring and over saturated. 

RL fans are definitely afraid of one sided score lines. But why is it ok for England to take a hammering but not Wales or France? 

My point about San Marino is they are happy to face the best players in the world, even though they have no chance of winning. I'm sure the USA for example would love to play against England RL, even though they wouldn't win. It gives them an opportunity to play against the best RL players in the world. I'm sure GB's table tennis players would love to face China at the Olympics. Same with British tennis players playing Djokovic on Centre Court at Wimbledon. They won't win, but it's all about the experience. The opportunity has to be there. 

I'm sure every person in every sport wants to face the best players. That doesn't mean we can or should facilitate it. Some isn't logistical, some isn't practical and some isn't safe.

In football, there are lots of teams you would consider up there for other teams to play. They can also play more games in a season due to the nature of the sport. Even so, football have tried to move in from the boring international friendlies as they were struggling to draw a crowd, and have since created the Nations League to avoid it.

We are not football.

I completely agree the opportunity needs to be there for them to play them. I don't agree that should just have games arranged for the sake of it as these wouldn't be meaningful. There needs to be more internationals at the level they are at, with the opportunity to play the best. They shouldn't just play the best because they want to, they need to earn it through qualifying for it to have more meaning.

[Futtocks]

Has this been posted yet? They are planning to scupper the women's World Cup by pushing back the start of the NRLW season to October. Note that the World Cup does not get a single mention in this article.

https://www.nrl.com/news/2021/07/30/nrlw-now-a-standalone-october-event-after-kick-off-delay/?utm_source=WomensFBContent&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=NetworkContent

[Rioman]

1 hour ago, Damien said:

And the spin continues. Let's just completely ignore the fact that organisers offered to vaccinate all players:

 

Well sixty odd million of us have managed not to contract it.   An example of making the statements fit the story,

Edited July 30, 2021 by Rioman

[Wellsy4HullFC]

6 minutes ago, londonrlfan said:

England v Ireland in 2013 got 24k sell out and 1m viewers on BBC, England v Scotland in 2016 got 20k and 1.6m viewers on BBC. Why do some RL fans still believe fans only want to watch NZ and Australia? 

These were World Cup or 4N games. These were games that had meaning to them. They weren't just ad hoc friendlies or small time filler tournaments. 

England Vs several qualifying nations would have some meaning and some interest. England Vs France for the sake of having them play England doesn't. 

England RL fans want to see meaningful games. The key is making these other games have meaning.