Rugby League World Cup 2021 (Merged Threads)

[Wellsy4HullFC]

45 minutes ago, londonrlfan said:

True. But the NRL has no interest in International competition. They will just extend NRL/SOO in the usual international slot.

IRL needs to move on without them. Put some time into France, USA, Canada, Jamaica, Balkans, Nigeria, Latin America etc. 

 

Edited July 30, 2021 by Wellsy4HullFC
Double post

[Wellsy4HullFC]

40 minutes ago, londonrlfan said:

True. But the NRL has no interest in International competition. They will just extend NRL/SOO in the usual international slot.

IRL needs to move on without them. Put some time into France, USA, Canada, Jamaica, Balkans, Nigeria, Latin America etc. 

Putting "some time" into those nations would take a lot of cash and 20 years at least. England for stick a huge score on all of them with their 3rd yeah, such is the lack of quality in those nations unfortunately.

Without the southern hemisphere, we have no competitive teams to play. This is a fact unfortunately. Other than France, all the others require the NRL players to be at least competitive.

Amongst themselves, there would be some great competition; but with England involved, it would only go one way. I'm not saying we shouldn't play them, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking they'd be competitive with us. They wouldn't be.

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, Hello said:

Nail on head.

Seems harsh but I agree it's what Lam deserves.

You hold him down, I'll get the hammer.

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

Just now, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Putting "some time" into those nations would take a lot of cash and 20 years at least. England for stick a huge score on all of them with their 3rd yeah, such is the lack of quality in those nations unfortunately.

Without the southern hemisphere, we have no competitive teams to play. This is a fact unfortunately. Other than France, all the others require the NRL players to be at least competitive.

Amongst themselves, there would be some great competition; but with England involved, it would only go one way. I'm not saying we shouldn't play them, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking they'd be competitive with us. They wouldn't be.

I think this is the unfortunate reality of the situation, and we're reaping what seeds we've sown (or more accurately, not sown) over the past 20 years.

I do think we should be playing these other countries regardless, but without games against the big guns as well, then the international scene unfortunately looks extremely weak.

[Damien]

It is completely nonsensical that the most well organised and best funded World Cup so far is being cited as an example to get rid of the IRL. This is particularly so after what happened in Australia in the 2017 World Cup run by the Aussies. These are two prime examples of why people like Gould should be shouted the reverse when it comes to the international game. 

[lucky 7]

15 minutes ago, The Partisan said:

Has there been any mention on whether Australian or NZ game officials are also withdrawals? 

Aussie refs won't be missed they are terrible.

[Scubby]

The NRL wants to extend opportunities for NRL players to make more money for the NRL. SOO now only covers part of that after previously covering all of it.

Clubs - SOO (NRL qualified players) = Money

Clubs - NRL players who don't qualify for SOO - NZ, Tonga, Fiji, PNG, Samoa tests = Money

Every now and them invite France and England to create an NRL World Cup and NRL 9s = Money

 

Edited July 30, 2021 by Scubby

[Damien]

 

 

[lucky 7]

16 minutes ago, rlno1 said:

If he was heartbroken he would have come out and said or done something. He is on Fox....paid by the NRL/Murdoch.

 

14 minutes ago, GeordieSaint said:

Of course they are. But they already control the sport. Have done for years. They don't own all the levers; but nothing happens without their agreement. Now they want all the levers. 

 

13 minutes ago, dkw said:

Ive written a reply to that vermin Gould about 5 times, each time it sets off factual and calm but degenerates quickly into me calling him a worthless archaic, out of touch cretinous old "redacted"....man I`m furious at how this whole thing has been played out by the NRL rats, the whole thing was planned to allow them to take control of the international RL and make more money, thats it. Its utterly sickening that they feel they can act this way, and even more annoying that the likelihood is they will get away with it scott free. the NRL, the NRL clubs, the NRL bought for media, mouthpieces and all the other trash they are involved with can go to hell and I for one look forward to the almost certain implosion when they fall out with each other again. 

 

10 minutes ago, Hello said:

Nail on head.

 

5 minutes ago, Damien said:

It is completely nonsensical that the most well organised and best funded World Cup so far is being cited as an example to get rid of the IRL. This is particularly so after what happened in Australia in the 2017 World Cup run by the Aussies. These are two prime examples of why people like Gould should be shouted the reverse when it comes to the international game. 

Who would have thought that we would ever associate Aussies with being cowards, but we do now. The Aussies who died at Gallipoli must be turning in their graves at the cowardly act of Australian Rugby League

[gingerjon]

7 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Reality is clubs are competiting so if a player goes but he can still do a job for them or another club will sign him, they will. Also if the game dies here alot of pacific players will lose a chance to build or rebuild their careers in northern hemisphere. 

All 16 clubs will be the same. The NRL is a cartel.

Would an Australian passport carrying Lebanese player (eg) find it easy to get a work visa for playing rugby league in the UK - and would it pay as well as the NRL?

[gingerjon]

9 minutes ago, Damien said:

It is completely nonsensical that the most well organised and best funded World Cup so far is being cited as an example to get rid of the IRL. This is particularly so after what happened in Australia in the 2017 World Cup run by the Aussies. These are two prime examples of why people like Gould should be shouted the reverse when it comes to the international game. 

How dare you.

They got that sponsorship from a pie shop in Sydney and, out of the blue, Harvey Norman threw in some money.

[Whippet13]

7 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Reality is clubs are competiting so if a player goes but he can still do a job for them or another club will sign him, they will. Also if the game dies here alot of pacific players will lose a chance to build or rebuild their careers in northern hemisphere. 

Exactly, the NRL clubs have no morals when it comes to signing "tainted" players, just look at the Folau to St George stuff recently as an example. They wanted him until the fan / sponsor backlash exploded. Regardless of who goes to the WC individual NRL clubs will still try to sign the best players they possibly can. 

[GeordieSaint]

11 minutes ago, Damien said:

It is completely nonsensical that the most well organised and best funded World Cup so far is being cited as an example to get rid of the IRL. This is particularly so after what happened in Australia in the 2017 World Cup run by the Aussies. These are two prime examples of why people like Gould should be shouted the reverse when it comes to the international game. 

I don't post on Twitter but hopefully someone has relayed this very point.

[unapologetic pedant]

2 hours ago, Scubby said:

You don't keep hanging around with the majority of people you went to school with for a reason. Once the obligation of sitting in a classroom everyday is done, you get to decide which people you want to hang around with and which you leave behind.

But if you got along with some of your school friends, you wouldn`t fall out with them simply because you`d fallen out with some other people on the other side of the world.

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

I don't think the NRL clubs would look to blacklist players who opt to play in the World Cup - I don't think that would play well in terms of supporting their arguments for player welfare.

Instead, I think they will try and bribe them with promises of guaranteed test matches in the coming years or even this Autumn. And maybe even their own 'World Cup'.

[JonM]

22 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Putting "some time" into those nations would take a lot of cash and 20 years at least. England for stick a huge score on all of them with their 3rd yeah, such is the lack of quality in those nations unfortunately.

Without the southern hemisphere, we have no competitive teams to play. This is a fact unfortunately. Other than France, all the others require the NRL players to be at least competitive.

Amongst themselves, there would be some great competition; but with England involved, it would only go one way. I'm not saying we shouldn't play them, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking they'd be competitive with us. They wouldn't be.

I think we'd find ourselves pretty competitive quite quickly. The losses from cancelling the world cup will bankrupt British RL unless the government stumps up some cash, and I can't see why they would. I'd expect most of our top players to be either in Union or the NRL (and hence unavailable for internationals) pretty sharpish. England v France in the situation where both countries instantly lose any good players would probably be fairly well balanced. 

[DI Keith Fowler]

As expected the thread has descended into a lot of Aussie bashing and I just want you all to know I'm here for it. 

[Damien]

1 minute ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

As expected the thread has descended into a lot of Aussie bashing and I just want you all to know I'm here for it. 

Its actually not because a lot of Aussies are just as outraged by this as us in the UK. NRL bashing certainly but few arguments aren't factual.

[londonrlfan]

33 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Putting "some time" into those nations would take a lot of cash and 20 years at least. England for stick a huge score on all of them with their 3rd yeah, such is the lack of quality in those nations unfortunately.

Without the southern hemisphere, we have no competitive teams to play. This is a fact unfortunately. Other than France, all the others require the NRL players to be at least competitive.

Amongst themselves, there would be some great competition; but with England involved, it would only go one way. I'm not saying we shouldn't play them, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking they'd be competitive with us. They wouldn't be.

I agree it would take 20 years, but you have to start from somewhere. If we do nothing, then international RL will just be Australia v England in front of a half empty Campbelltown every 5 years or so, if we're lucky. 

[EastLondonMike]

2 minutes ago, Damien said:

Its actually not because a lot of Aussies are just as outraged by this as us in the UK. NRL bashing certainly but few arguments aren't factual.

100%. Its about a few individuals at the ARLC and the NRL clubs and their sh!thouse tactics.

It will be interesting if/when any players speak up after todays announcement from the NRL clubs.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

1 minute ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

I think this is the unfortunate reality of the situation, and we're reaping what seeds we've sown (or more accurately, not sown) over the past 20 years.

I do think we should be playing these other countries regardless, but without games against the big guns as well, then the international scene unfortunately looks extremely weak.

It may require some out the box thinking to rectify the situation, as well as "insular" thinking too.

We need competitive rep games. We also need some variety and to build up the other nations' brand recognition. We also need to avoid too many blowouts which will damage the brand of international teams and international competitions.

A mixture of regional "state of origin" style matches and internationals might need to be the way forward for some guaranteed competitive games in the rep calendar. 

The thought of "Yorkshire v Lancashire" might have some shaking their heads, but given the choice of a competitive Yorkshire v Lancashire game (that would likely feature a good spread of SL players rather than the same top players from top few clubs and also be very competitive) and England v Wales (which would likely feature a few Championship players to make up the numbers and be a blowout), I know which one would interest more people currently. It's just where we are currently unfortunately.

 

[londonrlfan]

36 minutes ago, lucky 7 said:

Who would have thought that we would ever associate Aussies with being cowards, but we do now. The Aussies who died at Gallipoli must be turning in their graves at the cowardly act of Australian Rugby League

Interesting how the Americans were always seen as being insular, when in reality it's the Aussies. At least the NFL, NBA, NHL etc are trying to grow the product globally, the NRL just want to keep it in house. 

[The Rocket]

1 hour ago, Hela Wigmen said:

I’ve not seen anything that suggests that Australia and New Zealand won’t play international games or games against England. I read it as they will play, on their terms. Once the coup d’état gets more traction behind it, it’s then up to England to decide whether they follow suit and pander to the two of them in the hope they get some games against the two or go off on their own, becoming a huge fish in a tiny pond, relatively speaking, in which their biggest test will be Combined Nations. Ultimately, the cards are stacked in the favour of Australia and New Zealand. 

Yes according to that NRL sanctioned proposed 2018 international schedule that you posted on the top of pg.99 the program would include two groupings, England, France, PNG and Fiji and Australia, NZ, Tonga and Samoa playing each other in the northern and southern hemisphere respectively simultaneously at the end of the year.

I don`t mind the match up in either of those groups, now with regards to money, because the broadcast rights from each grouping holds little value to the other, because of time zones, then maybe the plan is for each hemisphere to sell the rights for themselves.

Without wanting to start a fight, it appeared even back then they viewed projects such as the Denver test as a complete waste of time, to be frank, it`s hard to disagree with that.

 Getting back to the first part looks like a bloody good plan if they are serious about it.

 

[londonrlfan]

3 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

But no TV company is going to pay for Yorkshire vs Lancashire whereas at least Wales vs England is something you can actually grow... 

England, France, Wales and one another (Jamaica, Scotland, Ireland?) in a knockout tournament every two years. You can put that in the calendar for the next ten years and the sponsors and broadcasters will know in advance and you can organise and plan venues well in advance. But in true RL style, we'll do it once and then moan that England won it too easily and never do it again. 

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Just now, ShropshireBull said:

But no TV company is going to pay for Yorkshire vs Lancashire whereas at least Wales vs England is something you can actually grow... 

No TV company is going to pay for Wales v England until it is competitive, and very few people will take interest in it whilst it isn't (in fact, it will probably have a negative impact).

In the meantime, we have an event with at least some history that would be a marketable event for now. You could also have Cumbria, North East, Midland and The South playing, and celebrate the spread of the game within England too.