Jump to content

Combined Nations to play England again next year & GB to return


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, M j M said:

GB or England really isn't a major issue. GB remains the stronger brand in my view and it's perplexing that people have decided they are very much against it.

Who do gb play against except Aus and Kiwis.  Just get serious about building Wales and France first. 

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


5 hours ago, Odsal Outlaw said:

On the Scotland playing home games in Featherstone, i challenged Scotland RL on this on Twitter and apparently it is a Jamaica home game not a Scottish one 🤷🏻‍♂️

So does that mean that the Jamaican RL will get the profits (if any) from the match?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Pulga said:

Why is any national team playing against a made-up exhibition team?

It devalues the brand of that national team. When will rugby league learn?

As other posters have pointed out, it's a case of working with what the British game has, or in other words making do.

As far as I can tell making do is what the British game has always done, and the poor results of that speak for themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Big Picture said:

As other posters have pointed out, it's a case of working with what the British game has, or in other words making do.

As far as I can tell making do is what the British game has always done, and the poor results of that speak for themselves.

I'd rather watch Ireland, Scotland or Wales get thrashed by 100 than watch exhibition teams.

  • Like 2

new rise.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, M j M said:

GB or England really isn't a major issue. GB remains the stronger brand in my view and it's perplexing that people have decided they are very much against it.

Whilst we’re still playing barely any internationals in years without a World Cup it’s a nonsense to pretend anyone cares about what the national team is called.

And that incudes the players who are now of a generation where England/GB don’t play and absolutely everything is about the clubs.

  • 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

19 hours ago, The Hallucinating Goose said:

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/england-combined-nations-all-stars-6086230

England are to play the Combined Nations team again mid-season next year. The article also confirms that the Fiji world cup warmup fixture will take place as planned and that there are hopes to have regular games against France. The bit that struck me the most though was where it says Great Britain are pencilled in to play in the next international calender, so I'm guessing that's probably for 2023. Personally I thought the last GB tour completely killed off the concept but apparently not. 

GB was scheduled in 2018 to tour Aus in 2023.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing as we're on the topic, the GB tour was supposed to return profits to the component nations, has anyone heard anything about how much has been distributed to the Welsh, Scots and Irish? Or, as expected, was the financial performance as bad as the physical?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."

Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a place for GB.

Unfortunately I don't think anyone in meaningful positions of influence recognises what that is; which is connected to the responses and ideas we've had in the whole game and results in Jamaica playing Scotland, England Knights and Wales in all 3 WF postcodes in recent times.

Even when gifted the opportunity of competitive internationals against local opposition for the first time in 20 plus years with Scotland post 2013 World Cup, they still failed to capitalise. Our leadership's obsession with Australia and NZ is now damaging us as we can be dropped so easily with no alternative.

They also used GB as an England trial tour in a different kit, which devalued the brand so many go on about more than anything else.

If it can't be done right, don't sully it's legacy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Chris22 said:

Whilst I appreciate the debate has been done to death, I think its important to look at the present too.

I don't think Scotland playing home internationals in Featherstone benefits anyone.

I think it's a hard sell to say "Come and watch great players like Morgan Knowles play for Wales, but he'll drop us in a flash once he's good enough to play for England".

From England's perspective, I agree there is little difference in the branding.

I mean, we have set that situation up ourselves by making it so blindingly obvious that GB was just another name for England - hence Regan Grace being ignored so we could play English half backs on the wing. What is Knowles supposed to think as a consequence of that? He knows the only way to get on that GB tour is to play for England because Welsh players aren't going to be picked.

As to Irish players appearing for GB, well that's a whole other issue - and one we continue to ignore.

  • Like 3

"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."

Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, nadera78 said:

I mean, we have set that situation up ourselves by making it so blindingly obvious that GB was just another name for England - hence Regan Grace being ignored so we could play English half backs on the wing. What is Knowles supposed to think as a consequence of that? He knows the only way to get on that GB tour is to play for England because Welsh players aren't going to be picked.

As to Irish players appearing for GB, well that's a whole other issue - and one we continue to ignore.

GB was created as a team of convenience to enable Welsh players (usually some of the best players in the league too) to play for the RFL international XIII.

It has never really shaken fact that despite all the history and heritage etc. Hence why they never played in Wales...

GB(&I) could be a vehicle to strengthen the home nations. Knowles, Currie etc could have the opportunity for big games against the Aussies and Kiwis every 4 years whilst still playing for Wales or Ireland in world and euro cups.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pulga said:

I'd rather watch Ireland, Scotland or Wales get thrashed by 100 than watch exhibition teams.

I don't think many others would. 

If you don't like something, just ignore it, it doesn't mean it's the worst thing ever. 

Personally I've enjoyed each of the exiles and Combined games, the quality of games has been decent and they are the kind of workout that England needs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, nadera78 said:

I mean, we have set that situation up ourselves by making it so blindingly obvious that GB was just another name for England - hence Regan Grace being ignored so we could play English half backs on the wing. What is Knowles supposed to think as a consequence of that? He knows the only way to get on that GB tour is to play for England because Welsh players aren't going to be picked.

As to Irish players appearing for GB, well that's a whole other issue - and one we continue to ignore.

 

2 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

GB was created as a team of convenience to enable Welsh players (usually some of the best players in the league too) to play for the RFL international XIII.

It has never really shaken fact that despite all the history and heritage etc. Hence why they never played in Wales...

GB(&I) could be a vehicle to strengthen the home nations. Knowles, Currie etc could have the opportunity for big games against the Aussies and Kiwis every 4 years whilst still playing for Wales or Ireland in world and euro cups.

We wouldnt always have somebody like Wayne Bennett in charge of GB who would act like a stubborn ass. 

But, whilst the concept and principle is nice, the likes of Currie would still pick England over Ireland as he would play in huge World Cup games instead of minor ones. 

As things stand, with the rules, Ireland and the Home Nations will generally end up with players playing when young and then old if they rely on lads born in England. GB won't change that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

There is a place for GB.

Unfortunately I don't think anyone in meaningful positions of influence recognises what that is; which is connected to the responses and ideas we've had in the whole game and results in Jamaica playing Scotland, England Knights and Wales in all 3 WF postcodes in recent times.

Even when gifted the opportunity of competitive internationals against local opposition for the first time in 20 plus years with Scotland post 2013 World Cup, they still failed to capitalise. Our leadership's obsession with Australia and NZ is now damaging us as we can be dropped so easily with no alternative.

They also used GB as an England trial tour in a different kit, which devalued the brand so many go on about more than anything else.

If it can't be done right, don't sully it's legacy.

The main issue with the GB tour was the selection of Wayne Bennett, unfortunately most bad things came from that.

The other problem is that the Aussies didn't want to play and we ended up with an uninspiring schedule. Touring NZ has never been profitable and attractive, NZ can return terrible crowds - look at some of their World Cup games for example. 

But even as someone watching as a supporter on TV, Bennett put me off with his attitude to it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

Whilst we’re still playing barely any internationals in years without a World Cup it’s a nonsense to pretend anyone cares about what the national team is called.

And that incudes the players who are now of a generation where England/GB don’t play and absolutely everything is about the clubs.

The abandonment of the 4N without a replacement is a travesty. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

 

We wouldnt always have somebody like Wayne Bennett in charge of GB who would act like a stubborn ass. 

But, whilst the concept and principle is nice, the likes of Currie would still pick England over Ireland as he would play in huge World Cup games instead of minor ones. 

As things stand, with the rules, Ireland and the Home Nations will generally end up with players playing when young and then old if they rely on lads born in England. GB won't change that. 

We will if the RFL pick the England coach to lead 2 years out from a "must win" home world cup with only 4 England games between then and now. I'd expect Shaun Wane to do the same. Its not stubbornness, its just their job if they have so few games with the England players.

Apologies I didn't make myself clear but the point would be to stop nation swapping between England and the other nations. That might hurt them initially, but it would also encourage long term commitment that we have only seen from the likes of Brough in recent times (ie those who could be playing for England).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The main issue with the GB tour was the selection of Wayne Bennett, unfortunately most bad things came from that.

The other problem is that the Aussies didn't want to play and we ended up with an uninspiring schedule. Touring NZ has never been profitable and attractive, NZ can return terrible crowds - look at some of their World Cup games for example. 

But even as someone watching as a supporter on TV, Bennett put me off with his attitude to it. 

Surely that is a complete failure of leadership from the RFL?

They asked Bennett to win England the world cup. He did poorly in the 2016 four nations, came second in 2017, beat New Zealand in a series in 2018, and would have had literally 4 games (3 aussie tests and a warm up) planned to do that on top of GB. I expect Shaun Wane or any England coach would have done similar frankly.

If your head coach and your board are at odds, and the board can't even play the team they wanted to, that is nothing less than calamitous? GB needed to be brought back as a success. It was a joke at pretty much every level.

Like I said there is a place for GB, but I don't think the people that matter have a clue what that is.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The abandonment of the 4N without a replacement is a travesty. 

The sad thing is there was a replacement down under with the oceania cup. It was once again England/GB/RFLXIII left behind the Times because of a plan they largely came up with!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

We will if the RFL pick the England coach to lead 2 years out from a "must win" home world cup with only 4 England games between then and now. I'd expect Shaun Wane to do the same. Its not stubbornness, its just their job if they have so few games with the England players.

Apologies I didn't make myself clear but the point would be to stop nation swapping between England and the other nations. That might hurt them initially, but it would also encourage long term commitment that we have only seen from the likes of Brough in recent times (ie those who could be playing for England).

I'm split on the nation swapping thing. The principle is sound, but in reality I just think we would end up with players not opting for lower ranked nations in the first place. 

And I completely disagree on the first point. We didn't used to see this with other coaches in charge, and his stubbornness led to silly things like Austin on the wing. Bennett is more stubborn than most, plenty of coaches would look at the bigger picture, and I include Wane in that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Surely that is a complete failure of leadership from the RFL?

They asked Bennett to win England the world cup. He did poorly in the 2016 four nations, came second in 2017, beat New Zealand in a series in 2018, and would have had literally 4 games (3 aussie tests and a warm up) planned to do that on top of GB. I expect Shaun Wane or any England coach would have done similar frankly.

If your head coach and your board are at odds, and the board can't even play the team they wanted to, that is nothing less than calamitous? GB needed to be brought back as a success. It was a joke at pretty much every level.

Like I said there is a place for GB, but I don't think the people that matter have a clue what that is.

There is no evidence that anyone else would have done what Bennett did. Literally none. 

Bennett had an Ashes series 12m in advance of the World Cup, not forgetting that the vast majority of the GB squad was eligible for England anyway. 

Once the RFL appointed him, they have to leave him to it, but I dont think any of them expected to see what he did. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

The sad thing is there was a replacement down under with the oceania cup. It was once again England/GB/RFLXIII left behind the Times because of a plan they largely came up with!

There isn't really a replacement of any worth. 

And I thought the RFL were behind the 8 nation Cup. 

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...