Jump to content

Rugby League World Cup 2021 (Merged Threads)


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Jim from Oz said:

Please no for 2026: that will again clash with the Soccer World Cup!!!

Does anyone know if the next RL World Cup will definitely be in 2025 and then four years after that? Has anything official been announced about that?

I'm pretty sure that in the press conference they confirmed it would be 2025.

That assumes Australia and New Zealand are happy to play then though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


23 minutes ago, Jim from Oz said:

Please no for 2026: that will again clash with the Soccer World Cup!!!

Does anyone know if the next RL World Cup will definitely be in 2025 and then four years after that? Has anything official been announced about that?

They've never been every four years before so why change now?

To be honest, on past record, 2021 was the least likely year for the World Cup to be held.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

I would let it go if I were you. Or disappear to the Guardian for a bit.

I didn’t say which side.

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 hour ago, Griff said:

They've never been every four years before so why change now?

To be honest, on past record, 2021 was the least likely year for the World Cup to be held.

Because that was the plan and decision made going back to the choosing of having the World Cup in 2013. The 4 year cycle going forward from then purposely avoids the Football World Cup, Olympics and RU World Cup.

They did also say that the 2025 World Cup will stay in 2025.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The European Rugby League's statements on the World Cup have been a little stronger than the others throughout this NRL inflicted farce and this is another. It's the first one that specifically really talks about the NRL. Of course the ERL and European Rugby League were the targets of comments by the likes of Richardson, Gould et al so probably know they have more to lose than anyone by the NRL's quest to take over. I think this is what everyone is waiting for from the NRL:

Given their impact on other nations in respect of the availability of NRL-based players, it is now imperative that the Australian Rugby League Commission and New Zealand Rugby League, who have pressured for the delay, fully deliver on their renewed commitment to this pinnacle event for the sport; it is time for actions not words.

https://europeanrugbyleague.com/articles/2002/european-rugby-league-board-statement-re...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Damien said:

Because that was the plan and decision made going back to the choosing of having the World Cup in 2013. The 4 year cycle going forward from then purposely avoids the Football World Cup, Olympics and RU World Cup.

They did also say that the 2025 World Cup will stay in 2025.

And you believed them ?

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 03/08/2021 at 15:11, DC77 said:

The quality of Irish players has declined, not that they “are confined to the lower leagues”. This decline is the reason they cannot compete with international players.

This decline is largely due to a decline in street football (take a look outside, there ain’t kids kicking a ball about honing their skills ala Robbie Keane in Tallaght, they are indoors on their gadgets). Talent rises to the top. If they were good enough they would make it. In the face of changing social norms not enough is invested in youth football (as Brian Kerr testifies), so there ain’t the conveyer belt of talent coming through. The decline in playing talent is precisely the same in Scotland (and it has a pro league that is easily accessible to any aspiring young Scottish player). 

You following the Longhorns is pretty abnormal though. Folk generally are more interested in talent, in eye catching play, in big games, in big events. It’s what people are drawn to. Again though, football is not parochial so there isn’t a comparison with RL (or say Gaelic football), the latter of which interest is confined to their own geographic location. 

That's a problem with most European nations, like I said Irish players are now competing against players from across the globe for spots in academies and squads in England, that's one of the main reasons why there has been such a massive decline in the amount of premier league players produced here. Not having a fully professional domestic league to fall back on, where players could compete in European competitions instead of wasting away in the lower leagues in England is criminal.

Scotland are producing far more top level players than we are (hence why they were playing at the euros while we were losing to Luxemburg) and have always had better strength in depth due to their strong domestic league. Once again the "granny" rule has masked where Irish football really is for decades, the only thing is now we are pulling "plastic paddies" out of league one instead of the premier league.

Edited by Keith989
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, 17 stone giant said:

The Australians don't strike me as people who are ambivalent about international sport. I would say that they're equally as passionate about it as we are in the UK. They love the Ashes cricket, they watch the Wallabies, they are watching in increasing numbers their football team, they love the Olympics, and I'm sure they love international RL too, when it's of a certain standard.

That last bit is the key, and it's absolutely NO different to us. We (England) don't bother playing Scotland, Wales, Ireland, and loads of other teams, because the administrators know that very few people are interested. The crowd would be poor, and the game would probably even lose money. We're not a load of sheep who would sell out Old Trafford for RL matches against Scotland, just because we're all so blindly in love with international RL.

The sad reality is that a lot of international RL is considered ######, by most people. And that includes most RL fans in England. That's why so few fixtures are ever arranged, and why when they are, the crowds are poor. It's also the reason why England play All Star teams.

Fantastic post. Everyone critiquing Aussies need to grasp this.

Their apathy is understandable, much like the apathy of England towards the like of France. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Big Picture said:

Unfortunately, what you described there won't change if and when the NRL gets control over the International game. They don't have any answers to that situation any more than British RL administrators do.

I agree that the NRL running the game won’t change a thing. They are pushing a wide open door in Australia. The onus is on the people running the game here to have a better plan. Toronto I feel was a way forward as I can only see growth happening if it comes from outside these shores where there isn’t any perception of what RL is (a regional game detached from those outside it), but they were treated pretty shabbily imo.

Vlandys, Gould and co. don’t come across well at all, but the general criticism of Australia I have never got. Their apathy towards the game outside Aus is fully warranted. As 17 stone giant rightly points out, Aussies are not insular when it comes to sport, in fact they are arguably the least insular as it’s their major chance to shine on the world stage. The problem is RL doesn’t give them the competitive or financial incentive that is required. Won every RLWC bar one for half a century, won every series against GB for half a century. Winning is humdrum when it’s that frequent. Of course it’s the opposite for GB (or Eng) as having not won in so long winning would then become monumental, but you can’t judge them by your own standards. You have to take a step back and see it from both sides. Then there’s the financial disparity. If your domestic league is worth billions (Aus), and a what is deemed a successful RLWC makes £4 million, this affects the Aussie brand. The Aussie media builds up RL as a big time sport, a RLWC counters that effort. 

Ultimately the game outside Aus has to make it worthwhile for Aus.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, DC77 said:

Fantastic post. Everyone critiquing Aussies need to grasp this.

Their apathy is understandable, much like the apathy of England towards the like of France. 

Have England lost to France of 2 on the last 4 occasions? Australia has won only 2 test matches in 5 years and lost the other two they have played (including to a tier 2 nation). Yet the international field is deemed not competitive by them? I don't buy it. 

Edited by Scubby
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, DC77 said:

Fantastic post. Everyone critiquing Aussies need to grasp this.

Their apathy is understandable, much like the apathy of England towards the like of France. 

Yes some good points in that previous post. However I think most people are critiquing the NRL and not Aussies and there is a difference.

NRL want to reduce the number of international opportunities to suit their players and needs eg the incredulous no games ever 4th year and no games ‘in season’ as they stupidly call it.

Of course the SL are the same with too many games and also RFL with the challenge cup.

Until somehow we go back to the national associations being able to implement fixture planning then we’ll never change things as the clubs are (as ever it was) all powerful.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Scubby said:

Have England lost to France of 2 on the last 4 occasions? Australia has won only 2 test matches in 5 years and lost the other two they have played (including to a tier 2 nation). Yet the international field is deemed not competitive by them? I don't buy it. 

Apathy is also caused by not paying games whilst other events like SOO are promoted as the pinnacle instead. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, gingerjon said:

It will be a thing.

And now think about the same group not knowing whether the next World Cup is 2025 or 2026 or happening at all.

Someone can come along to blame union for the current state of league.

For a long time now I've been of the opinion that the real reason for the game's weakness and stunted growth was not Union at all, but the small-minded parochialism of its own leaders.  This sorry episode has shown that very clearly.

6 hours ago, Jim from Oz said:

Please no for 2026: that will again clash with the Soccer World Cup!!!

Does anyone know if the next RL World Cup will definitely be in 2025 and then four years after that? Has anything official been announced about that?

I'd suggest that they first have to make sure it goes ahead next year now before they can think further ahead.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, theswanmcr said:

NRL want to reduce the number of international opportunities to suit their players and needs eg the incredulous no games ever 4th year and no games ‘in season’ as they stupidly call it.

I don't agree with a year off, as I think Australia need to play every year. I don't have a problem with the no 'in season' games though, providing that all the players are available for the October/November fixtures. They've said that we can still do whatever we want 'in season', providing that we don't use our NRL based players. I think that's fair. I think that leaves us plenty of scope for doing our own thing in Europe.

England could play France 1 to 3 times every year, mid season. We don't need our NRL players for that, as the games will (initially at least) be fairly comfortable wins for England. If somewhere down the line France are more competitive, we can review having the NRL players take part, but I don't see it's a big issue right now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, EastLondonMike said:

I see Billy Kikau is now being linked with a union switch, with French RU being the suitors.

No surprise there. 

Am sure the usual suspects will be along to pontificate that he is "no great loss", that the NRL is a "production line" of 1.96m confrontational, aggressive, athletic, sprinters, and that him leaving "won't stop Penrith scoring loads of tries". (Copyright Davo from Cumbria). 

Meanwhile union will continue to hoover up the 'bums on seats' players who actually want to see the world, and proudly represent their country in international "rugby". 

The navel gazing will continue. 

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, The Frying Scotsman said:

No surprise there. 

Am sure the usual suspects will be along to pontificate that he is "no great loss", that the NRL is a "production line" of 1.96m confrontational, aggressive, athletic, sprinters, and that him leaving "won't stop Penrith scoring loads of tries". (Copyright Davo from Cumbria). 

Meanwhile union will continue to hoover up the 'bums on seats' players who actually want to see the world, and proudly represent their country in international "rugby". 

The navel gazing will continue. 

 

The NRL has lost a few Fijian players back to your favourite sport & it’s usually for nothing else but huge wage increases,it shows no sign of collapsing.

Hoovering up 😀 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scubby said:

Have England lost to France of 2 on the last 4 occasions? Australia has won only 2 test matches in 5 years and lost the other two they have played (including to a tier 2 nation). Yet the international field is deemed not competitive by them? I don't buy it. 

They have dominated the sport unlike any national team in any other sport. Half a century bar one RLWC of complete dominance. And losing one tournament doesn’t affect you when it’s rare. It’s greeted with a shrug. For Australia to pay any attention to the game outside Australia there has to be a challenge, a sustained challenge. 

 

2 hours ago, Spidey said:

Balls.   If they claim to be the best in world, they have to play the rest of the world

Half a century of near complete dominance, yeah they are the best. By a long long way. With a lack of competition outside the club game they elevated State of Origin to fill the gap. 

2 hours ago, Damien said:

Apathy is also caused by not paying games whilst other events like SOO are promoted as the pinnacle instead. 

Apathy caused State of Origin to take off.

If the situation was the same in cricket with little competition outside Australia there’d be a state of Origin in Aussie cricket to match RL. 

 

 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, DC77 said:

They have dominated the sport unlike any national team in any other sport. Half a century bar one RLWC of complete dominance. And losing one tournament doesn’t affect you when it’s rare. It’s greeted with a shrug. For Australia to pay any attention to the game outside Australia there has to be a challenge, a sustained challenge. 

Tournaments in the last 20 years

Won - 2004 Tri Nations, 2006 Tri Nations, 2010 Tri Nations, 2013 World Cup, 2016 Four Nations, 2017 World Cup - 2 WC, 4 Tri/4 Nations

Lost - 2005 Tri Nations, 2008 World Cup, 2011 Four Nations, 2014 Four Nations - 1 WC 3 Tri/4 Nations

Won 6 Lost 4

Plenty of other teams have dominated as much or more than this in the last 20 years.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe this whole thing is just like NHL not stopping their tournament to allow players to go to the winter Olympics. They did it a couple of times but then realized it's not in their interest to do it and now the olympic tournament's level is quite low. Luckily all NHL players not making the playoffs can play for their national teams in the world championships every year, but this doesn't affect the NHL and so everybody is happy. Some would argue that the NHL's choice is short sighted in terms of developing the game in new areas, but they know their business. Good young hockey players from all the traditional countries ( Sweden, Finland, Russia, etc ) are willing to play there and constantly fill the ranks of new and old clubs in North America. I don't know if the power of NHL in the world of ice hockey is comparable with the power of NRL on rugby league on the world stage. But if I understand correctly, they can afford to ignore what happens outside Australia/New Zealand, ad they just do it. With no intent of trolling or to anger anybody, I can't help myself wondering if SL wouldn't do the same if they were in the same situation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Scubby said:

Tournaments in the last 20 years

Won - 2004 Tri Nations, 2006 Tri Nations, 2010 Tri Nations, 2013 World Cup, 2016 Four Nations, 2017 World Cup - 2 WC, 4 Tri/4 Nations

Lost - 2005 Tri Nations, 2008 World Cup, 2011 Four Nations, 2014 Four Nations - 1 WC 3 Tri/4 Nations

Won 6 Lost 4

Plenty of other teams have dominated as much or more than this in the last 20 years.

They won 2011, so that's 7-3. Thank goodness for the Kiwis or they'd have won everything.

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...