Jump to content

WCC 2022


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, DC77 said:

Neighbours? What a huge deal that was....Angry Anderson on Top of the Pops.

Frisky likes to make out the Aussies are irrelevant, deliberately overlooking how much stuff on TV he (and we) have consumed from them growing up...Henderson Kids, Home and Away, Round the Twist, Halfway across the galaxy and turn left, Heartbreak High...and Frisky’s personal favourite, Prisoner Cell Block H.

Actually it was Hey Hey its Saturday - it was an Australian cross between Noels House party and tiswas- perfect viewing before a night out at the Roosters match and a few drinks.

Edited by Mr Frisky
Link to comment
Share on other sites


On 11/10/2021 at 13:41, Eddie said:

What are the chances of this happening? I’d love to see Saints play Penrith but I can’t see it happening; as the NRL didn’t want their players playing in a World Cup I doubt they’ll want a WCC. Hopefully I’m wrong though. 

 

On 11/10/2021 at 13:42, Damien said:

I can't see it taking place.

 

On 11/10/2021 at 13:55, Spidey said:

Aussies being Aussies

 

On 11/10/2021 at 13:56, Sports Prophet said:

Forgive me if I’m wrong but I think Ivan was one of the earliest and biggest coach advocates for cancelling the RLWC due to player welfare.

Im sure he won’t want it to go ahead.

Sadly Aussies are very insular

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dave T said:

I'm genuinely not sure that England can develop these nations. I agree there is more to do, but in reality France and Wales are the real opportunities as they probably always have been, and they have support and are embedded into the RFL's pyramid. 

I don't see just organising games as developing the nations, but naturally a game in France is welcome - I would have preferred a 2 series home and away test, but we are where we are. 

There is no evidence that England just playing France and Wales will improve them, the hard work needs to be below that level, and the RFL doesn't have the funding and resources to develop French RL (and in fact shouldn't be responsible for it). 

The RFL can be a useful ally to these nations, but cannot be responsible for them. 

I think we are broadly agreeing, but maybe how we would do it slightly differing. 

Refusing to play them annually is not helping. New Zealand rugby is owned by the NRL, so yes you are dependent on them. Australia pull out and Kiwis copy. They own them so relying on Kiwis is relying on Australia. 

And you are chicken and egg here. There are no resources for WRL . Why ? Because they cannot generate any commercial or sponsorship deals without high profile games, like against England, who refuse to play them annually is an organised comp. Why? Because WRL is not of good quality. Why not? Because WRL do not have resources. 

 

The RFL and SL, being the only influence in NH RL (and people who would also benefit hugely from the increased commercial boon an annual tournament could produce) are the only ones who can make it happen. Again, the alternative is whinge about Australia coming over or begging them to let us play the Kiwis and again, we´ve already tried that way.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dave T said:

Let's look at the last 8 or 9 years - we haven't had a reliance on the Aussies (Kangaroos) at all - so I'm not sure why you keep saying that. We have played them only in organised major tournaments, outside of that we have played the Kiwis mainly, plus they have sent GB to play Tests against Tonga and PNG. 

The RFL staged the biggest World Cup ever in 2013. Just 8 years later they are/were on track to deliver an even bigger tournament, with record investment. 

The RFL have been key drivers in the RLWC and the 4Nations - and these tournaments have been key in getting some of the wider teams playing games against the bigger nations. 

I would love you to be right, but I see no evidence of England battering Jamaica and Wales in Wales as being a good thing. 

On your final point. Good for sponsors I´d say it would clearly be good. Plus, Scotland vs England was the highest rated tv figures for the last four nations. Which makes this begging of Australia (who after the world cup withdrawral we can cleary see own Kiwis) even more absurd. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

On your final point. Good for sponsors I´d say it would clearly be good. Plus, Scotland vs England was the highest rated tv figures for the last four nations. Which makes this begging of Australia (who after the world cup withdrawral we can cleary see own Kiwis) even more absurd. 

An England game on the BBC tends to get between 1 and 2 million whoever they play. The problem is that the BBC don't pay a fortune and nobody else wants it so we don't make much from that. 

We make little sponsorship from even the biggest events never mind Wales v England. 

The big variant is the crowd income, and whilst we have done well in the odd one off world cup game etc. we'd likely see 2 or 3k versus Wales away or maybe 5k in Salford. 

None of that is to say we shouldn't play the odd game against weaker nations, but your claims that we can build tournaments around the likes of Wales to replace tournaments with the Aussies is way off and backed with not a single ounce of evidence. 

By far the most sensible approach is to keep growing WC's with proper qualifying tournaments to give more nations games. Mid-season International breaks for more local games against the likes of Wales/Ireland/France etc would be great. 

They should be part of the solution, but they are most definitely not the solution. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ShropshireBull said:

Refusing to play them annually is not helping. New Zealand rugby is owned by the NRL, so yes you are dependent on them. Australia pull out and Kiwis copy. They own them so relying on Kiwis is relying on Australia. 

And you are chicken and egg here. There are no resources for WRL . Why ? Because they cannot generate any commercial or sponsorship deals without high profile games, like against England, who refuse to play them annually is an organised comp. Why? Because WRL is not of good quality. Why not? Because WRL do not have resources. 

 

The RFL and SL, being the only influence in NH RL (and people who would also benefit hugely from the increased commercial boon an annual tournament could produce) are the only ones who can make it happen. Again, the alternative is whinge about Australia coming over or begging them to let us play the Kiwis and again, we´ve already tried that way.  

How many years of playing Wales annually do you think it would be before we saw tangible improvement?

What is your realistic goal here? 

Because in all likely we will see huge scores with no interest from fans, sponsors or broadcasters. I'm interested in why you think it would be different from that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

How many years of playing Wales annually do you think it would be before we saw tangible improvement?

What is your realistic goal here? 

Because in all likely we will see huge scores with no interest from fans, sponsors or broadcasters. I'm interested in why you think it would be different from that? 

I think you mentioned England v Italy in the Six Nations. I think they've played each other for something like 24 consecutive years, with a handful of games before that.

The unique eco-system of England rugby union internationals means they carry on. But this is the outcome:

image.png.3ca2f963c8d81abbfe02b4e857b2de95.png

England v Wales wouldn't even be as close as that.

Which isn't an argument that the game should never be played. Just that playing it again and again without any context (NH Four Nations?) or development strategy backed by large wad of cash will achieve nothing.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 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

17 hours ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

That's such a narrow minded view of Australia.

In the 80s they also had Neighbours, Home and Away and Rolf Harris 

best aussie tv show ever has to be agro's cartoon connection... Kids show but very close to the bone... Some clips on youtube

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, UTK said:

This disparity didn't just pop up out of nowhere though, it has been accentuated over time by England's continued neglect of their own backyard. It is a myth that England cares about the international game as a whole, England only cares about what benefits England (Exiles/Combined Nations anyone?). England have refused to humour the European championships for over 15 years now, such a tournament is no chance of attaining any proper level of coverage and prestige without the strongest European nation participating.

Now that more SH nations have emerged as genuine contenders (some through heritage, some through proper development) England can no longer rely on SH teams to head north outside WCs as the SH have begun establishing their own regular tournaments (ie the Oceanic Cup exists where the 4N previously did). Consequentially, to find international opponents England now have to play development catch up with France + the Home Nations because they let the NH slip this far.

Is the southern hemisphere playing any fixtures this year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I think you mentioned England v Italy in the Six Nations. I think they've played each other for something like 24 consecutive years, with a handful of games before that.

The unique eco-system of England rugby union internationals means they carry on. But this is the outcome:

image.png.3ca2f963c8d81abbfe02b4e857b2de95.png

England v Wales wouldn't even be as close as that.

Which isn't an argument that the game should never be played. Just that playing it again and again without any context (NH Four Nations?) or development strategy backed by large wad of cash will achieve nothing.

Yes, this is my point. People think just playing games) improvement. Why? 

The Challenge too is that Italy joined a fully functioning tournament - you can't just start a new tournament with such a difference in standards. 

Getting these teams more regular, credible games, ideally in major tournaments is a sensible option. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Dave T said:

How many years of playing Wales annually do you think it would be before we saw tangible improvement?

What is your realistic goal here? 

Because in all likely we will see huge scores with no interest from fans, sponsors or broadcasters. I'm interested in why you think it would be different from that? 

Because Scotland vs England in a blowout got more figures than Eng vs Australia. Because it will be in the november period and therefore start of christmas shopping time. Because more players would stop declaring for England if Wales actually got some games and if Wales players were getting regular SL exposure as part of the inclusion of a team protected in SL with minimum player quotas. 

My realistic goal is an annual tournament, bar a world cup year, where Wales and France have significantly increased their commercial income, sponsorship, events and crucially participation due to the annual exposure playing against England on FTA provides, which is complimented by a Welsh and two French Teams locked in SL to give players the all round competitive environment they are going to need to improve. 

I also think it will actually be good for england to, commercially. 

Edited by ShropshireBull
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dave T said:

Yes, this is my point. People think just playing games) improvement. Why? 

The Challenge too is that Italy joined a fully functioning tournament - you can't just start a new tournament with such a difference in standards. 

Getting these teams more regular, credible games, ideally in major tournaments is a sensible option. 

A better example would have been the Pumas. Who were basically Argentina going up against the elite of SH rugby for years and led to them being established as a tier 1 nation within 2 world cup cycles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

A better example would have been the Pumas. Who were basically Argentina going up against the elite of SH rugby for years and led to them being established as a tier 1 nation within 2 world cup cycles. 

Why would that be a better example? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Why would that be a better example? 

Because Italy has two divided teams playing in a weaker comp where they aren´t exposed to the best players on a weekly basis. Unlike the Pumas where they just had essentially the national team at one side, playing against the elite of that sport. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

Is the southern hemisphere playing any fixtures this year?

Nope nothing scheduled down here this season. Glad they haven't in a sense because it would've been a further kick in the teeth for the RLWC organisers I'd imagine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ShropshireBull said:

Because Italy has two divided teams playing in a weaker comp where they aren´t exposed to the best players on a weekly basis. Unlike the Pumas where they just had essentially the national team at one side, playing against the elite of that sport. 

So why is that a good example of what would happen in your scenario?

Wales have only ever been strong due to RU players, which has dried up. I used to love watching them in the 90s when the had some brilliant talent. But they are nothing like that now. 

Look at what happened in the Knights vs Jamaica game last night for the reality of what would happen on the field. 

I should add, I don't disagree that these teams should have more exposure to top nations, particularly France, but that should be through riding England's coat-tails with SH teams. I. E. England should be hosting tours by some of the strong SH teams and they should be playing against Wales and France for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dave T said:

So why is that a good example of what would happen in your scenario?

Wales have only ever been strong due to RU players, which has dried up. I used to love watching them in the 90s when the had some brilliant talent. But they are nothing like that now. 

Look at what happened in the Knights vs Jamaica game last night for the reality of what would happen on the field. 

I should add, I don't disagree that these teams should have more exposure to top nations, particularly France, but that should be through riding England's coat-tails with SH teams. I. E. England should be hosting tours by some of the strong SH teams and they should be playing against Wales and France for example.

Its a good example because we would have one welsh team in sl competiting on a weekly basis against England internations so they woukd improve.

2nd point Again. Chicken and egg . Why would people declare for WRL when they play noone? Prospect of annual comp and games vs England changed that equation.

Finally , your solution is England should play Australia and Kiwis which suggests you have learnt little from our recent trouble. Australia is not interested and have the oceanic cup.  

What you are suggesting is the failed status quo.  The market for Wales and France to grow is a tournament vs England.  If England dont want to invest in growing the int game they shouldnt be surprised to find themselves with noone to play. 

Edited by ShropshireBull
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Its a good example because we would have one welsh team in sl competiting on a weekly basis against England internations so they woukd improve.

2nd point Again. Chicken and egg . Why would people declare for WRL when they play noone? Prospect of annual comp and games vs England changed that equation.

Finally , your solution is England should play Australia and Kiwis which suggests you have learnt little from our recent trouble. Australia is not interested and have the oceanic cup.  

What you are suggesting is the failed status quo.  The market for Wales and France to grow is a tournament vs England.  If England dont want to invest in growing the int game they shouldnt be surprised to find themselves with noone to play. 

You are just making things up. 

I say we should play SH teams. That means Aus, NZ, Tonga, PNG, Samoa, Fiji etc. 

Also, you are overstating the problems here. The RFL have arranged plenty of games against SH nations without issue, and will continue to do so. We were due an Ashes in 2020 and a WC in 2021 - whilst I don't agree with their reasons in the slightest, without Covid, these things would have been staged. In fact, the Aussies appear to want to go back to 30 years ago when the big teams just played each other more regular. 

You are suggesting cutting off your nose to spite your face. The SH teams are the ones that are a draw, sure we should support NH teams and look to drive growth there, but that should be alongside the SH tests, not instead of. 

The idea of replacing the Aussies and Kiwis with Wales and France is a pipe dream. Again, that's not to say we shouldn't be growing these games, France games return an OK crowd for the minimal effort, so there is definitely growth to be had there, but they aren't going to replace the Kangaroo's as a draw. 

The approach of stick a team in SL and it'll improve the international performance has never worked. 

I'd suggest it is you who is not learning anything from history. 

Bold talk is just that. Talk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

You are just making things up. 

I say we should play SH teams. That means Aus, NZ, Tonga, PNG, Samoa, Fiji etc. 

Also, you are overstating the problems here. The RFL have arranged plenty of games against SH nations without issue, and will continue to do so. We were due an Ashes in 2020 and a WC in 2021 - whilst I don't agree with their reasons in the slightest, without Covid, these things would have been staged. In fact, the Aussies appear to want to go back to 30 years ago when the big teams just played each other more regular. 

You are suggesting cutting off your nose to spite your face. The SH teams are the ones that are a draw, sure we should support NH teams and look to drive growth there, but that should be alongside the SH tests, not instead of. 

The idea of replacing the Aussies and Kiwis with Wales and France is a pipe dream. Again, that's not to say we shouldn't be growing these games, France games return an OK crowd for the minimal effort, so there is definitely growth to be had there, but they aren't going to replace the Kangaroo's as a draw. 

The approach of stick a team in SL and it'll improve the international performance has never worked. 

I'd suggest it is you who is not learning anything from history. 

Bold talk is just that. Talk. 

TV figures as I told you before were higher for Eng vs Scotland rugby league than Eng vs Australia it that 4 nations.  So you are already wrong about the draw. 

You are confusing rl tragics with the real market of casual viewers . The draw is the TV market in an annual comp.  

This is about growing commercial income. And I would suggest that the stick a team in SL with no minimum player requirements didnt work but thats more to do with who the RFL let run crusaders than it not being a good model. 

This obsession with Australia is simply backwards.  They have financially got to a position where England doesnt matter. Begging SH sides to play you is not a strategy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ShropshireBull said:

TV figures as I told you before were higher for Eng vs Scotland rugby league than Eng vs Australia it that 4 nations.  So you are already wrong about the draw. 

You are confusing rl tragics with the real market of casual viewers . The draw is the TV market in an annual comp.  

This is about growing commercial income. And I would suggest that the stick a team in SL with no minimum player requirements didnt work but thats more to do with who the RFL let run crusaders than it not being a good model. 

This obsession with Australia is simply backwards.  They have financially got to a position where England doesnt matter. Begging SH sides to play you is not a strategy. 

Your last line is weird. You seem to think that simply playing games against SH teams is an obsession. That is why your idea is wrong from the off, because it is based on nonsense. 

Seeing playing games against all of the other top 7 ranked teams in the World as a bad thing is just bizarre.

Your whole strategy for England's international future appears to be based on anger with the Aussies.

In reality your ideas will lead to 2k in a random stadium in Wales in SL before they go bust, and England sticking 90 on Jamaica in front of 2.5k in Leigh on Our League. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Sounds like Penrith want it to happen, but does the NRL ?

NRL 2022: Penrith Panthers ready to revive World Club Challenge – if St Helens travel (smh.com.au)

Penrith Panthers supremo Brian Fletcher has ruled out a trip to England for the largely forgotten World Club Challenge but would be willing to host Super League champions St Helens at BlueBet Stadium.

Fletcher said he had heard nothing about the St Helens game, but it was still an important fixture and the Panthers were happy to accommodate Saints at BlueBet Stadium.

“If St Helens want to come out here and play us, it would be great. We’d pack the stadium out, for sure. Australia’s vaccination rate would also be more than 95 per cent by that stage.

“It’s an important game and you’d love to see it played.”

And the catch:

NRL clubs normally travel to England because Rugby Football League and Super League clubs pick up their tab.

The Australian clubs receive anywhere between $350,000 to $500,000, which is predominately used for flights and accommodation.

Travelling England teams, however, are not returned the favour when it comes to subsidising costs. 

There`s a competition on the other side of the world on the bones of its` ass and we`re too lousy to return the favour by subsidising a trip to Oz that could be made part of any pre-season schedule.

And it`s true, they would pack out the stadium at Penrith and given the excitement  surrounding any Grand Final winning team I have little doubt that any Oz GF winning team could fill a local stadium.

We`ve got another competition on the other side of the world that can only add credibility to our own competition, it would be all over the papers and T.V for the few days that they were here - so why aren`t we hosting it every second year. I just don`t get it.

 

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, The Rocket said:

Sounds like Penrith want it to happen, but does the NRL ?

NRL 2022: Penrith Panthers ready to revive World Club Challenge – if St Helens travel (smh.com.au)

Penrith Panthers supremo Brian Fletcher has ruled out a trip to England for the largely forgotten World Club Challenge but would be willing to host Super League champions St Helens at BlueBet Stadium.

Fletcher said he had heard nothing about the St Helens game, but it was still an important fixture and the Panthers were happy to accommodate Saints at BlueBet Stadium.

“If St Helens want to come out here and play us, it would be great. We’d pack the stadium out, for sure. Australia’s vaccination rate would also be more than 95 per cent by that stage.

“It’s an important game and you’d love to see it played.”

And the catch:

NRL clubs normally travel to England because Rugby Football League and Super League clubs pick up their tab.

The Australian clubs receive anywhere between $350,000 to $500,000, which is predominately used for flights and accommodation.

Travelling England teams, however, are not returned the favour when it comes to subsidising costs. 

There`s a competition on the other side of the world on the bones of its` ass and we`re too lousy to return the favour by subsidising a trip to Oz that could be made part of any pre-season schedule.

And it`s true, they would pack out the stadium at Penrith and given the excitement  surrounding any Grand Final winning team I have little doubt that any Oz GF winning team could fill a local stadium.

We`ve got another competition on the other side of the world that can only add credibility to our own competition, it would be all over the papers and T.V for the few days that they were here - so why aren`t we hosting it every second year. I just don`t get it.

 

 

 

F$$$$ Em !!! its just not worth the hassle with the NRL these days, they spout more BS than a politician.

They wont come to England cos of Covid (heard that one before)

They'll only come to the UK ever if they get $0.5M compensation

But its OK you can come here, but we wont give you $0.5M compensation, you'll have to fund it yourselves

What that piece also doesn't say is they want it to take place just before the NRL season starts, which is now after the SL season has started, meaning Saints would have to rearrange 2-3 SL games to accommodate it in an already shortened season because of the WC. 

  • Like 2

St.Helens - The Home of Rugby Champions

Saints Men's team - Triple Champions & Double Winners ; Saints Women's team - Treble Winners ; Thatto Heath - National Conference Champions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 22/11/2021 at 09:38, The Rocket said:

Sounds like Penrith want it to happen, but does the NRL ?

NRL 2022: Penrith Panthers ready to revive World Club Challenge – if St Helens travel (smh.com.au)

Penrith Panthers supremo Brian Fletcher has ruled out a trip to England for the largely forgotten World Club Challenge but would be willing to host Super League champions St Helens at BlueBet Stadium.

Fletcher said he had heard nothing about the St Helens game, but it was still an important fixture and the Panthers were happy to accommodate Saints at BlueBet Stadium.

“If St Helens want to come out here and play us, it would be great. We’d pack the stadium out, for sure. Australia’s vaccination rate would also be more than 95 per cent by that stage.

“It’s an important game and you’d love to see it played.”

And the catch:

NRL clubs normally travel to England because Rugby Football League and Super League clubs pick up their tab.

The Australian clubs receive anywhere between $350,000 to $500,000, which is predominately used for flights and accommodation.

Travelling England teams, however, are not returned the favour when it comes to subsidising costs. 

There`s a competition on the other side of the world on the bones of its` ass and we`re too lousy to return the favour by subsidising a trip to Oz that could be made part of any pre-season schedule.

And it`s true, they would pack out the stadium at Penrith and given the excitement  surrounding any Grand Final winning team I have little doubt that any Oz GF winning team could fill a local stadium.

We`ve got another competition on the other side of the world that can only add credibility to our own competition, it would be all over the papers and T.V for the few days that they were here - so why aren`t we hosting it every second year. I just don`t get it.

 

All Penrith and the NRL have to do is host the match on the same basis as what happens in England. They take on the risk, pay for the costs and hosting but this should be more than made up for by the profits. That is the risk that the English game has to take on board every year. Surely the NRL with all its superior administration and marketing, so we are told, aren't afraid to take on that risk?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 22/11/2021 at 16:38, The Rocket said:

Sounds like Penrith want it to happen, but does the NRL ?

NRL 2022: Penrith Panthers ready to revive World Club Challenge – if St Helens travel (smh.com.au)

Penrith Panthers supremo Brian Fletcher has ruled out a trip to England for the largely forgotten World Club Challenge but would be willing to host Super League champions St Helens at BlueBet Stadium.

Fletcher said he had heard nothing about the St Helens game, but it was still an important fixture and the Panthers were happy to accommodate Saints at BlueBet Stadium.

“If St Helens want to come out here and play us, it would be great. We’d pack the stadium out, for sure. Australia’s vaccination rate would also be more than 95 per cent by that stage.

“It’s an important game and you’d love to see it played.”

And the catch:

NRL clubs normally travel to England because Rugby Football League and Super League clubs pick up their tab.

The Australian clubs receive anywhere between $350,000 to $500,000, which is predominately used for flights and accommodation.

Travelling England teams, however, are not returned the favour when it comes to subsidising costs. 

There`s a competition on the other side of the world on the bones of its` ass and we`re too lousy to return the favour by subsidising a trip to Oz that could be made part of any pre-season schedule.

And it`s true, they would pack out the stadium at Penrith and given the excitement  surrounding any Grand Final winning team I have little doubt that any Oz GF winning team could fill a local stadium.

We`ve got another competition on the other side of the world that can only add credibility to our own competition, it would be all over the papers and T.V for the few days that they were here - so why aren`t we hosting it every second year. I just don`t get it.

 

 

 

I'm sure if Saints are offered the same generous expenses that Aussie teams get when they come here they might be tempted

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Future is League said:

I'm sure if Saints are offered the same generous expenses that Aussie teams get when they come here they might be tempted

Maybe, but it still doesn't solve the fixture issue unless Penrith also agree to have the game played in January before the SL season starts.

St.Helens - The Home of Rugby Champions

Saints Men's team - Triple Champions & Double Winners ; Saints Women's team - Treble Winners ; Thatto Heath - National Conference Champions

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...