Jump to content

Rugby League World Cup 2021 (Merged Threads)


Recommended Posts


20 hours ago, Lowdesert said:

I didn’t think he was like vlandys at all.

The way he dealt with Mike Mayer has a lot of similarities to this.

Edited by Big Picture
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dave T said:

We are going to Chester Zoo in a couple of weeks, we won't be admiring the Panthers or Eels even if you paid me. 

Spot on Dave whenever we go to Knowsley safari park I make the family look at the floor whilst I speed through the Wolves and Rhino sections. 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Chris22 said:

To be fair to Gould, at least he has the guts to be honest for the reasons he supports the withdrawal. His reasoning is stupid but he doesn't hide behind covid. Unlike V'Landys et al who are to cowardly to be honest about their motives.

Really, you're actually defending the bloke?  The irony is that his twitter feed has a tag line "Silence, is the best reply, to fools" and yet the guy can't keep his mouth shut from spouting off right, left and center (never mind the low intelligence use of commas lol)

Edited by Hello
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, The Hallucinating Goose said:

I was just thinking, we talk about wanting people in France to be more aware of their RL heritage, well if the World Cup is to go ahead without Australia and NZ, France will be the only nation to compete at every RLWC, just a little fact that they could be proud of and really embrace. 

The GB was really England so there has always been an England presence of players if not in name.

France were the instigator of the WC in RL and France the first nation to hold a WC. It was mainly through a man Paul Barrière who also was behind the formation of the International RL board. He refused to have his name attached to the WC trophy. He learned about RL when fighting for the French resistance and became heavily involved with RL after the war.

When people today think about the RL WC, they forget the efforts of those before them and even the present WC committee have made. That in itself should create a feeling of respect for the WC. Maybe I'm too sentimental. 

  • Like 5

My blog: https://rugbyl.blogspot.co.nz/

It takes wisdom to know when a discussion has run its course.

It takes reasonableness to end that discussion. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chris22 said:

To be fair to Gould, at least he has the guts to be honest for the reasons he supports the withdrawal. His reasoning is stupid but he doesn't hide behind covid. Unlike V'Landys et al who are to cowardly to be honest about their motives.

Aye that’s a fair point. I disagree with Gould, but at least he has the balls to give the reaL reasons - which you can make a case for from an “Australia-only” perspective, even if you’d disagree with them

 

The COVID-19 smokescreen though is just cowardly on every level - on the surface level because every other sport is putting their balls on the block to keep going despite the challenges, and on the deeper level because it’s just convenient spin because the NRL lacks the moral fortitude to be honest about it’s real self-interested reasons, rather than pass the buck to the players’ alleged interests 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are so many inconsistent statements. Trent Robinson just said that the difference was that Europe has handled the pandemic with vaccinate and be less restrictive but in the SH it was lockdown and not so big on vaccinating. For that reason the refusal to go was understandable.

If it the difference was governmental handling of the virus, why were NZ in particular insisting on assurances from the WC committee of a protection level based, not on their efforts, but the general handling of the situation? if Trent has read this right, the WC committee could never deliver an assurance they would be happy with. So this waiting for assurances the NZRL engaged in could only end with one result. I think they knew that. It was all done to look like there was a legitimate reason to pull out when that was going to be the the outcome regardless of assurances. It hasn't fooled everyone. 

 

  • Like 1

My blog: https://rugbyl.blogspot.co.nz/

It takes wisdom to know when a discussion has run its course.

It takes reasonableness to end that discussion. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RayCee said:

The GB was really England so there has always been an England presence of players if not in name.

France were the instigator of the WC in RL and France the first nation to hold a WC. It was mainly through a man Paul Barrière who also was behind the formation of the International RL board. He refused to have his name attached to the WC trophy. He learned about RL when fighting for the French resistance and became heavily involved with RL after the war.

When people today think about the RL WC, they forget the efforts of those before them and even the present WC committee have made. That in itself should create a feeling of respect for the WC. Maybe I'm too sentimental. 

I think it's something we should promote more, the origins of the trophy is something we hear nothing about. There are strong emotional and historical links which would probably change opinions in certain areas if they were more widely known.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, welshmagpie said:

Anything to read into here? Irish coach asks Irish international to DM him. Are countries like Ireland pressing on with planning with knowledge the public are yet to have?

Or is it just nothing?

4322E6C0-CFB6-47C0-A710-86DC4D823C2E.jpeg

At the moment the WC is still on so no drama, coaches should be building squads. What is worrying is that Littler doesn't know the number of one of his players and chose to ask him for it publically on Twitter or whatever. Seems a bit unprofessional.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Whippet13 said:

At the moment the WC is still on so no drama, coaches should be building squads. What is worrying is that Littler doesn't know the number of one of his players and chose to ask him for it publically on Twitter or whatever. Seems a bit unprofessional.

Aye, you’d think Ireland RL would have all details available to Littler so that he doesn’t need to badger on Twitter - especially given LMS is already capped and registered 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Dunbar said:

Even if you are right and their ambition is to support countries where there is development underway and they see heritage World Cups as something of a waste of time... they have chosen a hell of a way of going about it.

You are defined by your actions and I can tell you now how I define the leadership of the game in Australia.

After I got off here last night and lay in bed thinking about what I had posted I knew there was so many holes in my argument that I almost wished I had never put it up. But if you do know me a little bit by now you will realise I do tend to give people the benefit of the doubt, and I do try to have faith in peoples motives or at least I do try to understand them.

As far as having Heritage teams involved, it didn`t stop the British Gov`t stumping up $47m(OZ), it didn`t stop big name sponsors or the BBC from coming on board, and it didn`t deter loads of people buying tickets for the tournament before it started. So I`m not quite sure why that would bother the NRL.

And I can`t help thinking of what I think was your argument that a successful WC in your country will probably go a long way to ensuring a successful one in France in four years time.

Any way unless some news breaks and there are some new developments I`ve said enough on the topic. Thanks for your time.

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RayCee said:

The GB was really England so there has always been an England presence of players if not in name...

Whilst English players always made up the majority of the GB side, things were very different before union went professional and players came to us from south Wales (and a lesser extent the Scottish border counties). I couldn't agree that GB was really England. 

Every single GB world cup squad contained non-English players - as many as 4 Welshman and 1 Northern Irishman in 1957. All the home nations were represented at various points and of GB's 3 world cup wins, there was 1 Scottish, 1 English and 1 Welsh captain.

It was the RFL's choice to stop entering GB in world cups, but if it goes ahead this year without Aus and NZ, France will definitely be the only country to have competed in every competition. 

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

16 hours ago, gingerjon said:

You haven't read the past few pages then?

No , I've been working away in Barrow , thought it might have been suggested but wasn't going to trawl through so many pages 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

Whilst English players always made up the majority of the GB side, things were very different before union went professional and players came to us from south Wales (and a lesser extent the Scottish border counties). I couldn't agree that GB was really England. 

Every single GB world cup squad contained non-English players - as many as 4 Welshman and 1 Northern Irishman in 1957. All the home nations were represented at various points and of GB's 3 world cup wins, there was 1 Scottish, 1 English and 1 Welsh captain.

It was the RFL's choice to stop entering GB in world cups, but if it goes ahead this year without Aus and NZ, France will definitely be the only country to have competed in every competition

The first highlighted part was the point I was making. The second highlighted area seems to me to undermine what you were saying. In a whole squad only a few were not English lads. GB could have been called England, not had players from other nations and still been just about as competitive. I don't say that to disparage any players who represented GB but it was effectively an England side with a few very worthy additions. 

On the third highlight, I said " there has always been an England presence of players if not in name". 

It was a minor point in a post emphasising the French influence on the international game. 

My blog: https://rugbyl.blogspot.co.nz/

It takes wisdom to know when a discussion has run its course.

It takes reasonableness to end that discussion. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RayCee said:

The first highlighted part was the point I was making. The second highlighted area seems to me to undermine what you were saying. In a whole squad only a few were not English lads. GB could have been called England, not had players from other nations and still been just about as competitive. I don't say that to disparage any players who represented GB but it was effectively an England side with a few very worthy additions. 

On the third highlight, I said " there has always been an England presence of players if not in name". 

It was a minor point in a post emphasising the French influence on the international game. 

I don't think we disagree beyond your wording 'GB was really England', which you wrote in response to a post highlighting the possibility of France becoming the only country to have competed in every world cup.

Of course there's always been English players at RL world cups and an England team could have been entered in each world cup GB competed in without the core of the team being very different, but that's not the same as 'GB was really England'.

The 5 Welsh/N Irish players in 1957 equated to 28% of the GB world cup squad. At the time, Scotland, Wales and N Ireland contained 20% of the UK population so those 5 were an over representation. I think that is quite significant when all of the RL clubs in the UK at the time represented places in Yorks, Lancs or Cumberland.

Edited by Barley Mow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Rocket said:

After I got off here last night and lay in bed thinking about what I had posted I knew there was so many holes in my argument that I almost wished I had never put it up. But if you do know me a little bit by now you will realise I do tend to give people the benefit of the doubt, and I do try to have faith in peoples motives or at least I do try to understand them....Any way unless some news breaks and there are some new developments I`ve said enough on the topic. Thanks for your time.

I think we've all said things that in hindsight we would have said differently.

I appreciate your input and unbiased honesty and many others here would feel the same way. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

My blog: https://rugbyl.blogspot.co.nz/

It takes wisdom to know when a discussion has run its course.

It takes reasonableness to end that discussion. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Whippet13 said:

I think it's something we should promote more, the origins of the trophy is something we hear nothing about. There are strong emotional and historical links which would probably change opinions in certain areas if they were more widely known.

What would you promote though?  The trophy was inaugurated for a tournament with only four teams, for which the Aussies apparently insisted that their expenses be guaranteed up front and the Great Britain team was weakened by clubs refusing to release players for it, not exactly an auspicious beginning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone genuinely think the pacific island teams aren’t going to fold to the pressure? It’s depressing in a way I never thought I’d say on a RL forum, but Boris Johnson is probably British rugby league’s only hope….my god.

Edited by Tex Evans Thigh
  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Formerly Alistair Boyd-Meaney

fifty thousand Poouunds from Keighley...weve had im gid."

3736-mipm.gif

MIPM Project Management and Business Solutions "

Discounts available for forum members contact me for details

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Tex Evans Thigh said:

Does anyone genuinely think the pacific island teams aren’t going to fold to the pressure? It’s depressing in a way I never thought I’d say on a RL forum, but Boris Johnson is probably British rugby league’s only hope….my god.

Yep That is it, the fact the British government has put in so much money to this tournament means the UK government should be putting pressure on those Pacific Island governing bodies.

But equally, the NRL will be ruthless in their pressure to get the Pacific Island nations to fold.

As I have said earlier on this thread, it all comes down to the Monday meeting of the Asia Pacific rugby league Federation. If the five Pacific Island nations commit to the World Cup, then it can be saved!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can’t remember if I have posted this or not but just in case I haven’t:

 

This is absolutely laughable! He has just thrown an atomic bomb into the middle of international rugby league with his withdrawal at four minutes notice Of the Australian team from the World Cup!

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/in-with-a-real-shot-why-league-is-confident-of-olympic-inclusion-in-2032-20210724-p58cle.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, fighting irish said:

We need to change this attitude, right across the world.

We must get beyond seeing fledgling nations as ''Mickey Mouse'' and begin treating the organisations and the people involved with the respect they deserve, given that they are committing to ''our'' game and doing the best they can with the energy they can muster. 

The Aussies have regarded us as "Mickey Mouse" since the 80s. In turn, we regard the French as "Mickey mouse". We even have an attitude to the Kiwis that they`re not the Australians, i.e. not the real deal. What hope for "fledgling nations" to be valued and taken seriously?

There are miserable off-field cultural aspects to all this negativity, but I would also draw a connection to the attitudes expressed on forum threads about blowouts that assert RL games are not worth watching unless the scores are close. And I would attribute those to abysmal levels in understanding of the game, all too apparent in the media coverage.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

The Aussies have regarded us as "Mickey Mouse" since the 80s. In turn, we regard the French as "Mickey mouse". We even have an attitude to the Kiwis that they`re not the Australians, i.e. not the real deal. What hope for "fledgling nations" to be valued and taken seriously?

There are miserable off-field cultural aspects to all this negativity, but I would also draw a connection to the attitudes expressed on forum threads about blowouts that assert RL games are not worth watching unless the scores are close. And I would attribute those to abysmal levels in understanding of the game, all too apparent in the media coverage.

I see blow outs in just about every sporting tournament but somehow RL must be gauged differently. I view tournaments as a celebration of the sport and all attendees contributors. Hopefully out of this comes more respect and the RFL view internationals in Europe/Northern hemisphere as a vital part of the yearly calendar. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

My blog: https://rugbyl.blogspot.co.nz/

It takes wisdom to know when a discussion has run its course.

It takes reasonableness to end that discussion. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • John Drake changed the title to Rugby League World Cup 2021 (Merged Threads)
  • John Drake locked and unlocked this topic

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...