Jump to content

Rugby League World Cup 2021 (Merged Threads)


Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I think England, as the only nation in the Northern Hemisphere which can carry serious media, sponsorship and broadcast interest, could be incredibly helpful to lift these nations from the park fields and one bloke with a casio video recorder levels.

Australia, like it or not, has done that for the Pacific Islands. I hope they can grow beyond that now too, but the foundational leg up ultimately has been driven by Australian (and to a lesser extent Kiwi) assistance.

The reality is that few RL players, even and especially Australian RL Players, will pay thousands of pounds to fly across the world to play in an amateur tournament without the resources and facilities. 

Whilst it of course isn't England's job to build up these nations, it is also a direct consequence of not doing so that means England are stuffed if the NRL/ARL says no. It is absolutely in England's interest to build up our nearest competitors. We have failed to do so comprehensively in the past decade, despite the significant opportunities presented. 

Absolutely fair to say England shouldn't impact the development of nations around it. Equally fair to acknowledge that doing nothing has a cost too.

I'm not sure that's a fair comparison. There's more to development than internationals: we have two French and two welsh teams playing in the RFL structure, that's a huge boost - or should be - to the development of those nations.

But for Ireland and Scotland, we'd be asking the RFL to build up the sport almost entirely from nothing, which I don't think is reasonable, and I don't think Australia or NZ have done anything comparable at their end of the world. Remember, them playing Tonga and Samoa mostly just involves them shuffling around players that were born in/grew up in the Aussie or NZ rugby heartlands. They were already good.

But they're not really doing anything in the islands. The folk still on the islands do feel some connection to the heritage players so it's having some effect, but only really by driving more migration. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


39 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I think England, as the only nation in the Northern Hemisphere which can carry serious media, sponsorship and broadcast interest, could be incredibly helpful to lift these nations from the park fields and one bloke with a casio video recorder levels.

Australia, like it or not, has done that for the Pacific Islands. I hope they can grow beyond that now too, but the foundational leg up ultimately has been driven by Australian (and to a lesser extent Kiwi) assistance.

The reality is that few RL players, even and especially Australian RL Players, will pay thousands of pounds to fly across the world to play in an amateur tournament without the resources and facilities. 

Whilst it of course isn't England's job to build up these nations, it is also a direct consequence of not doing so that means England are stuffed if the NRL/ARL says no. It is absolutely in England's interest to build up our nearest competitors. We have failed to do so comprehensively in the past decade, despite the significant opportunities presented. 

Absolutely fair to say England shouldn't impact the development of nations around it. Equally fair to acknowledge that doing nothing has a cost too.

For these nations to get anywhere near being useful for England it will cost many millions, loads of manpower and a lot of years. That isn't the RFL's remit. 

The RFL have been absolutely right in supporting the development of the IRL and channeling effort through there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

I'm not sure that's a fair comparison. There's more to development than internationals: we have two French and two welsh teams playing in the RFL structure, that's a huge boost - or should be - to the development of those nations.

But for Ireland and Scotland, we'd be asking the RFL to build up the sport almost entirely from nothing, which I don't think is reasonable, and I don't think Australia or NZ have done anything comparable at their end of the world. Remember, them playing Tonga and Samoa mostly just involves them shuffling around players that were born in/grew up in the Aussie or NZ rugby heartlands. They were already good.

But they're not really doing anything in the islands. The folk still on the islands do feel some connection to the heritage players so it's having some effect, but only really by driving more migration. 

So now we're saying Tonga and Samoa aren't real teams? Its a fair comment, but I prefer International RL with them in.

Having two French and two Welsh teams is great. I didn't say England had done nothing to help build up our near neighbours. I said we had failed. That of course includes things we have done, and things we haven't.

Outside of World Cups and 4 Nations tournaments (where there are qualifiers and draws to consider), England have played international test matches Northern Hemisphere opponents just 8 times in the past 10 years. That includes 6 games against France and 1 apiece against Wales and Italy. That record to me is nothing short of appalling.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

For these nations to get anywhere near being useful for England it will cost many millions, loads of manpower and a lot of years. That isn't the RFL's remit. 

The RFL have been absolutely right in supporting the development of the IRL and channeling effort through there. 

Will it? Will it cost much more than the CNAS did/does?

I think we'd be foolish to think that England RL couldn't help lift these nations from playing in effectively amateur level Parks to a bit more of a serious organisation. Even if we then decided we'd play the Aussies or Kiwis afterwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tommygilf said:

Will it? Will it cost much more than the CNAS did/does?

I think we'd be foolish to think that England RL couldn't help lift these nations from playing in effectively amateur level Parks to a bit more of a serious organisation. Even if we then decided we'd play the Aussies or Kiwis afterwards.

How much will it cost? 

Combined All Stars gives England a tough preperation game. England sticking 80 on Wales or Ireland doesn't do that. 

The RFL should of course help where they can, but that is limited based on limited funds. 

But my understanding is that the RFL were a driving force behind the start of the Euro Championship and it was they who drove the 3N to 4N which brought in importance to that tournament where Wales, France and Scotland then qualified. 

But we really are in a situation where if an RL nation doesn't have players,nor teams, or can't afford to stage games then we can't do everything for them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

So now we're saying Tonga and Samoa aren't real teams? Its a fair comment, but I prefer International RL with them in.

Having two French and two Welsh teams is great. I didn't say England had done nothing to help build up our near neighbours. I said we had failed. That of course includes things we have done, and things we haven't.

Outside of World Cups and 4 Nations tournaments (where there are qualifiers and draws to consider), England have played international test matches Northern Hemisphere opponents just 8 times in the past 10 years. That includes 6 games against France and 1 apiece against Wales and Italy. That record to me is nothing short of appalling.

No criticism intended of Tonga and Samoa at all, Tonga's rise has been the best thing to happen to international rugby league in years. I'm just saying getting them there largely involved a group of NRL pros deciding they wanted to play, and the NRL deciding, just about, not to actively prevent it. Et voila: another world class team or two appear. Great, I've built my world cup schedule around them. 

But the Aussies have done almost nothing beyond that to develop the game in the islands (PNG excepted) and in the same vein, I dont think a whole lot more could have been asked of the RFL. 

The Irish RL authorities don't want to go down the Tonga route of an all heritage team - fair enough - but that does mean they can't field a team that should remotely be on a field with an England team made up of SL pros.

Outside world cups I don't think the England RU team play more games than RL against nations with amateur players, and it's for the same reasons. At best its an embarrassing result, at worst it's downright dangerous. 

Of course I'd love it if we could develop something remotely like the 5 Nations, but the starting point on the ground is so far from that that I don't see how offering Ireland and Scotland a pasting every year helps anything. 

Having said all that... I thought England HAVE agreed to play in the next European championship haven't they? We may well get to see whether that draws in more heritage players in a fashion acceptable the Irish authorities, whether it makes the games a worthwhile contest and whether it has any affect on their domestic game. 

If there's a holistic strategy for Ireland and Scotland, rather than just scheduling games on hope, then I'm all for it. 

Edited by Toby Chopra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Dave T said:

How much will it cost? 

Combined All Stars gives England a tough preperation game. England sticking 80 on Wales or Ireland doesn't do that. 

The RFL should of course help where they can, but that is limited based on limited funds. 

But my understanding is that the RFL were a driving force behind the start of the Euro Championship and it was they who drove the 3N to 4N which brought in importance to that tournament where Wales, France and Scotland then qualified. 

But we really are in a situation where if an RL nation doesn't have players,nor teams, or can't afford to stage games then we can't do everything for them. 

In the two games in the past 10 years we've played against Ireland or Scotland we've won 42-0 (vs Ireland at Huddersfield in RLWC 2013) and 38-13 (vs Scotland at Coventry in Four Nations 2016, a match we were losing till 5 mins before half time iirc). Its fair to say Ireland have improved since then.

Comparisons with Wales and France are less helpful imo, as realistically they do not benefit from NRL based players coming over anything like what Ireland or Scotland could. Italy, Serbia and Lebanon could be added there too. Considering that player movement is at the core of the debate here, I think it doesn't have as much relevance.

It was also the RFL, and former RFL CEO, that argued to get rid of the then 4 nations to bring back tours and GB... Just as the tournament was maturing and was arguably in line for expansion.

CNAS provides nothing other than that game. Few people go watch, I suspect we're not far off AB Sundecks sponsoring the match.

I think we need to quickly grasp opportunities when they present themselves. Scotland are always going to be stuck at Galashiels etc unless they play England or someone similar in a game they can take to Glasgow or Edinburgh. Wales playing at Llanelli is nice and quaint. France add at least 10k or treble the crowd when they play England at home. It can help us too to build up these teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Damien said:

You completely miss the point. There is also nothing charitable about players that have earned a World Cup place playing in a World Cup, that's complete nonsense. If we had what you say then as things stand it would still do sweet fa when it comes to developing the game in Ireland. What you say is great for the RLWC but it's absolutely no use for Irish RL. As I have already said.

I don't recall it doing Jack Charlton much harm with the support from the Irish public in his tenure as manager when he selected a number of what would be best described as "heritage" players.

Just saying.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

No criticism intended of Tonga and Samoa at all, Tonga's rise has been the best thing to happen to international rugby league in years. I'm just saying getting them there largely involved a group of NRL pros deciding they wanted to play, and the NRL deciding, just about, not to actively prevent it. Et voila: another world class team or two appear. Great, I've built my world cup schedule around them. 

But the Aussies have done almost nothing beyond that to develop the game in the islands (PNG excepted) and in the same vein, I dont think a whole lot more could have been asked of the RFL. 

The Irish RL authorities don't want to go down the Tonga route of an all heritage team - fair enough - but that does mean they can't field a team that should remotely be on a field with an England team made up of SL pros.

Outside world cups I don't think the England RU team play more games than RL against nations with amateur players, and it's for the same reasons. At best its an embarrassing result, at worst it's downright dangerous. 

Of course I'd love it if we could develop something remotely like the 5 Nations, but the starting point on the ground is so far from that that I don't see how offering Ireland and Scotland a pasting every year helps anything. 

Having said all that... I thought England HAVE agreed to play in the next European championship haven't they? We may well get to see whether that draws in more heritage players in a fashion acceptable the Irish authorities, whether it makes the games a worthwhile contest and whether it has any affect on their domestic game. 

If there's a holistic strategy for Ireland and Scotland, rather than just scheduling games on hope, then I'm all for it. 

Ireland seem to flit on their heritage position regularly. Along with Scotland they can put out competitive fully pro sides made up of Super League and NRL players. I don't see why they can't be Tonga or Samoa, at least on the pitch, for us in the NH.

I'm not sure what England's involvement in the Euros will be. I had hoped for the England team, but suspect given the Kiwi tour that it will be the Knights. The RFL couldn't run a team as England when GB were playing last time, so lets see...

I think revenue generation is important, and Internationals help us spread the game in England too. Suddenly locations like Bristol become viable for test matches. Brentford in London too.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

I think England, as the only nation in the Northern Hemisphere which can carry serious media, sponsorship and broadcast interest, could be incredibly helpful to lift these nations from the park fields and one bloke with a casio video recorder levels.

Australia, like it or not, has done that for the Pacific Islands. I hope they can grow beyond that now too, but the foundational leg up ultimately has been driven by Australian (and to a lesser extent Kiwi) assistance.

The reality is that few RL players, even and especially Australian RL Players, will pay thousands of pounds to fly across the world to play in an amateur tournament without the resources and facilities. 

Whilst it of course isn't England's job to build up these nations, it is also a direct consequence of not doing so that means England are stuffed if the NRL/ARL says no. It is absolutely in England's interest to build up our nearest competitors. We have failed to do so comprehensively in the past decade, despite the significant opportunities presented. 

Absolutely fair to say England shouldn't impact the development of nations around it. Equally fair to acknowledge that doing nothing has a cost too.

Australia have ... hosted some matches?

Who have they played in the past three years?

  • Like 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I don't recall it doing Jack Charlton much harm with the support from the Irish public in his tenure as manager when he selected a number of what would be best described as "heritage" players.

Just saying.

I don't recall Jack Charlton having much patience with players who weren't available for every game and who only wanted to feature in Ireland's big games.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

In the two games in the past 10 years we've played against Ireland or Scotland we've won 42-0 (vs Ireland at Huddersfield in RLWC 2013) and 38-13 (vs Scotland at Coventry in Four Nations 2016, a match we were losing till 5 mins before half time iirc). Its fair to say Ireland have improved since then.

Comparisons with Wales and France are less helpful imo, as realistically they do not benefit from NRL based players coming over anything like what Ireland or Scotland could. Italy, Serbia and Lebanon could be added there too. Considering that player movement is at the core of the debate here, I think it doesn't have as much relevance.

It was also the RFL, and former RFL CEO, that argued to get rid of the then 4 nations to bring back tours and GB... Just as the tournament was maturing and was arguably in line for expansion.

CNAS provides nothing other than that game. Few people go watch, I suspect we're not far off AB Sundecks sponsoring the match.

I think we need to quickly grasp opportunities when they present themselves. Scotland are always going to be stuck at Galashiels etc unless they play England or someone similar in a game they can take to Glasgow or Edinburgh. Wales playing at Llanelli is nice and quaint. France add at least 10k or treble the crowd when they play England at home. It can help us too to build up these teams.

If we played these teams mid-year we would batter them. Tournaments are the only way to get their quality heritage players over and playing regularly. 

On your last line "it can help us too..."  I'm afraid you need to highlight the real genuine tangible benefits to the RFL to invest in these nations? We can't keep trading on soundbites. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, gingerjon said:

I have it the other way round. It's where Ireland are in the scheme of things. If we ran a European Championship on a Nations League style - which we almost do a lot of the time - then England and Ireland would be in separate divisions right now.

I'm really not buying any argument that says it's England's fault in any way that Ireland's heritage players don't travel to play in their regular competitive fixtures.

(A wider debate about International RL's prestige and where exactly the money is, yes. 'England have to play Ireland for a game to count, no.')

Indeed, it's a ludicrous argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Australia have ... hosted some matches?

Who have they played in the past three years?

They created an international window for others to play, which we haven't, and used their broadcast partners to raise the profile of those games (including a fixture England partook in). Hopefully the PI nations can grow beyond the bounds of the Australians, but like an incubator, it has undeniably helped them progress.

Clearly the Aussies have been spooked by COVID and doubled down on their domestic calendar, but prior to that, in the year immediately following the 2017 world cup, they actually played Tonga; doing so again the following year. Grasping the opportunity as it arose rather than hanging around. They chose to do so instead of playing the much vaunted GB too. Could you imagine the other way around?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I don't recall it doing Jack Charlton much harm with the support from the Irish public in his tenure as manager when he selected a number of what would be best described as "heritage" players.

Just saying.

And there it is. It was only a matter of time.

Soccer is huge in Ireland and widely played and followed. Jack Charlton's teams also had a fair number of home grown players. It's a really stupid comparison. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Dave T said:

If we played these teams mid-year we would batter them. Tournaments are the only way to get their quality heritage players over and playing regularly. 

On your last line "it can help us too..."  I'm afraid you need to highlight the real genuine tangible benefits to the RFL to invest in these nations? We can't keep trading on soundbites. 

That's rather the point that is being made mate, in bold. Its silly to expect NRL players to pitch up for an amateur team setup halfway across the world. England can at least bring that tournament (either literally or in single tests).

For England, we can play test matches in areas where RL isn't massively present far more successfully than any "on the road" super league games or magic weekend. Non traditional audiences are less likely to turn their noses up at NH opposition in the way that we have seen at the LSV against France for example. Its perfectly plausible for England to get 20k+ against France or Ireland at Brentford for example. Or play Wales in Bristol or Cardiff.

Suddenly its much easier to sell RL to people without a strong team connection, and a growth to that casual audience. They also don't mind England winning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybody who has read what I have said about Heritage player's over the years will know I am not a fan of it moreso where England are concerned when we have enough player's to choose from, but we have what we have and without the heritage rules we wouldn't have a WC tournament just a 5 nations tournament. Now as a fan of the game who is going to attend the matches at the LSV which Ireland is going to be involved in I want to see the likes of Luke Keary playing, unlike England Ireland do not have the luxury of a big roster to choose from if they want to make an impression on the tournament then get  the 'blow in's in, if they want to just say "we played in it" then that is up to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Damien said:

And there it is. It was only a matter of time.

Soccer is huge in Ireland and widely played and followed. Jack Charlton's teams also had a fair number of home grown players. It's a really stupid comparison. 

Tbf football was nowhere near as popular in Ireland, or as widely played before 1988. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Damien said:

And there it is. It was only a matter of time.

Soccer is huge in Ireland and widely played and followed. Jack Charlton's teams also had a fair number of home grown players. It's a really stupid comparison. 

Just because it suits your argument Damien, it is the same principle whatever the size of the sport, the question is do they get Heritage player's in or not, there are two lads from Leigh in the squad not even a hint of the Irish in their voices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Damien said:

And there it is. It was only a matter of time.

Soccer is huge in Ireland and widely played and followed. Jack Charlton's teams also had a fair number of home grown players. It's a really stupid comparison. 

Its not an unfair point though, only 3 of the 11 who started against England at Italia 90 were born in Ireland. 

Any minority sport is going to rely on heritage players if it can. The trick is to use them as best as possible to increase income and popularity.

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

11 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

That's rather the point that is being made mate, in bold. Its silly to expect NRL players to pitch up for an amateur team setup halfway across the world. England can at least bring that tournament (either literally or in single tests).

For England, we can play test matches in areas where RL isn't massively present far more successfully than any "on the road" super league games or magic weekend. Non traditional audiences are less likely to turn their noses up at NH opposition in the way that we have seen at the LSV against France for example. Its perfectly plausible for England to get 20k+ against France or Ireland at Brentford for example. Or play Wales in Bristol or Cardiff.

Suddenly its much easier to sell RL to people without a strong team connection, and a growth to that casual audience. They also don't mind England winning.

I should have been clearer. A Euro's with England isn't the tournament to do this imho. 

We've never had crowds like you say, so I'm not sure where they are coming from. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I dont see an audience for a Euro tournament including England. I'd enjoy it, and I'd go and watch, but I just think we'd see low crowds and lopsided scores before it's scrapped. 

Back in the much celebrated 1990s England played in Wales when they had their star players and we got modest crowds. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

That's rather the point that is being made mate, in bold. Its silly to expect NRL players to pitch up for an amateur team setup halfway across the world. England can at least bring that tournament (either literally or in single tests).

This is snobbery and you do a great disservice to those professional players that play for Ireland time and again. As you do the Welsh and French professional players. There is absolutely nothing stopping games between those nations being meaningful and competitive.

I can't think of any other sport in which people would be arguing that a country where the game isn't played to any meaningful level and has only a handful of teams based around RU players and clubs has a right to play the best countries in the world.

Edited by Damien
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Its not an unfair point though, only 3 of the 11 who started against England at Italia 90 were born in Ireland. 

Any minority sport is going to rely on heritage players if it can. The trick is to use them as best as possible to increase income and popularity.

How many of them had only decided to play once they knew they'd be playing England in the World Cup?

  • Like 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

I should have been clearer. A Euro's with England isn't the tournament to do this imho. 

We've never had crowds like you say, so I'm not sure where they are coming from. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I dont see an audience for a Euro tournament including England. I'd enjoy it, and I'd go and watch, but I just think we'd see low crowds and lopsided scores before it's scrapped. 

Back in the much celebrated 1990s England played in Wales when they had their star players and we got modest crowds. 

We have a proven audience for international RL in the South of England, concentrated in London. We're not in a position to fill Wembley for example, but a modest ground, incidentally where London Irish play, I don't think is beyond reason for example.

I think there is generally more of an event going crowd now, as a broader point, than in the 90s. And equally GB was the national team then, with England and Wales only turning out in European cups against France.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tommygilf said:

We have a proven audience for international RL in the South of England, concentrated in London. We're not in a position to fill Wembley for example, but a modest ground, incidentally where London Irish play, I don't think is beyond reason for example.

I think there is generally more of an event going crowd now, as a broader point, than in the 90s. And equally GB was the national team then, with England and Wales only turning out in European cups against France.

I suppose we are debating hypothesis' so suppose we have to agree to disagree. I'd love you to be right, but I just don't see it. I don't see England as this huge draw in Ireland, Wales, Scotland or London. 

I expect we'd be talking 4 to 6k in any of those nations, maximum, maybe lower. I think we'd be lucky to get 8 to 10k in England. Now to be fair, that may be a decent starter for 10, particularly in appropriate grounds, but I just think the crowds would dwindle with uneven matches. 

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.