Jump to content

Sun 24th Oct: Intl: Jamaica v Scotland KO 3pm


Who will win?  

32 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will win?

    • Jamaica by 13 points or more
      1
    • Jamaica by 7 to 12 points
      4
    • Jamaica by 1 to 6 points
      9
    • Scotland by 1 to 6 points
      3
    • Scotland by 7 to 12 points
      7
    • Scotland by 13 points or more
      8

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 24/10/21 at 14:30

Recommended Posts


25 minutes ago, Ray Cashmere said:

I'm not sure whose responsibility it is but an annual series involving Scotland, Jamaica, Wales & Ireland is an absolute no brainer for all involved

The trouble is that those governing bodies don't have any money for a series like that, they'd need help from the RFL or RLEF.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

The trouble is that those governing bodies don't have any money for a series like that, they'd need help from the RFL or RLEF.

Scotland, Wales and Ireland already manage to get funding to play each other in non covid and World Cup years. Jamaica could be added in theory but they generally play the US and Canada, so when are these games going to be played?

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Griff said:

Scotland, Wales and Ireland already manage to get funding to play each other in non covid and World Cup years. Jamaica could be added in theory but they generally play the US and Canada, so when are these games going to be played?

And it generates zero revenue so unless it is for World Cup qualification I dont blame players for not bothering.

Scotland played Jamaica in Fetherstone, we arent giving these guys any reason to bother.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Scotland played Jamaica in Fetherstone, we arent giving these guys any reason to bother.  

I didn't see any lack of commitment from either side. I saw of bunch of players who were proud to be representing their country. Lachlan Walmsley moved to the UK specifically to try to get into the Scotland team for the world cup.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did a search on a Jamaican newspaper to see if anything made the news over there. I found a preview altho it is written very poorly for a Jamaican audience, feels like a copy and paste of an English article. No results or match reports tho.

This was a Jamaican home game we’re told, feels like a poor effort all round from them on the promotional effort and can’t really see any link to the Jamaican National comp apart from a loose mention of their coach back home.

https://www.jamaicaobserver.com/sports/reggae-warriors-name-squad-to-face-scotland_234443

Edited by Odsal Outlaw

Nottingham Outlaws Rugby League

Harry Jepson Winners 2008

RLC Midlands Premier Champions 2006 & 2008

East Midlands Challenge Cup Winners 2005, 2006, 2007 & 2008

Rotterdam International 9's Cup Winners 2005

RLC North Midlands Champions 2003 & 2004

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JonM said:

I didn't see any lack of commitment from either side. I saw of bunch of players who were proud to be representing their country. Lachlan Walmsley moved to the UK specifically to try to get into the Scotland team for the world cup.

 

Kind of shows my point.  'Moved for the World cup' not going to be here to play in maeaningless tournament. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Kind of shows my point.  'Moved for the World cup' not going to be here to play in maeaningless tournament. 

It's preparation for the world cup for both teams, no? I don't think anybody on the pitch was playing for the money.

The chance to play for your country, or even to play in the same match for or against someone who has, has been cited as a reason to take up RL by people all over Europe in the past few weeks - the Welsh and Irish women, for example. The pride and the amount of messages and social media I saw around the Czech team playing the Euro tournament in Turkey was fantastic. The point of the Scotland or Jamaica team is to get people in those countries playing or watching or sponsoring or whatever. 

Scotland's highest ever international crowd in cricket is 3000 odd - for a game against England. I've been to Wales football internationals in Cardiff with similar crowds to what Jamaica got in the past couple of weeks. Plenty of sports would be delighted to get a a couple of thousand paying spectators for an international match.

It's unrealistic to expect we're going to have something to match soccer, or rugby union internationals. It's unrealistic to expect England v France to match state of origin - there just aren't enough people playing in France - only around 70 clubs in France. It is realistic to do what the ERL has done and organise European championships - Serbia/Ukraine/Russia in Euro B and Czechia, Malta, Turkey, Netherlands in Euro D. The Euro A for France/Wales/Scotland/Ireland just needs to happen more often, on a consistent, regular basis and with promotion/relegation to the pool below.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JonM said:

It's preparation for the world cup for both teams, no? I don't think anybody on the pitch was playing for the money.

The chance to play for your country, or even to play in the same match for or against someone who has, has been cited as a reason to take up RL by people all over Europe in the past few weeks - the Welsh and Irish women, for example. The pride and the amount of messages and social media I saw around the Czech team playing the Euro tournament in Turkey was fantastic. The point of the Scotland or Jamaica team is to get people in those countries playing or watching or sponsoring or whatever. 

Scotland's highest ever international crowd in cricket is 3000 odd - for a game against England. I've been to Wales football internationals in Cardiff with similar crowds to what Jamaica got in the past couple of weeks. Plenty of sports would be delighted to get a a couple of thousand paying spectators for an international match.

It's unrealistic to expect we're going to have something to match soccer, or rugby union internationals. It's unrealistic to expect England v France to match state of origin - there just aren't enough people playing in France - only around 70 clubs in France. It is realistic to do what the ERL has done and organise European championships - Serbia/Ukraine/Russia in Euro B and Czechia, Malta, Turkey, Netherlands in Euro D. The Euro A for France/Wales/Scotland/Ireland just needs to happen more often, on a consistent, regular basis and with promotion/relegation to the pool below.

But I´m not talking about matching SoO or rugby union crowds. I´m talking about giving players a profile that comes from playing England on a regular basis to give those nations the chance to financially develope and commercially develope. 

Last time Scotland played England they were playing in front of 20,000 with 1,000,000 plus watching on FTA and a famous draw vs All Golds.. Since then they have had zero exposure. I´m just saying do it properly and give these nations a chance to be successful. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ShropshireBull said:

But I´m not talking about matching SoO or rugby union crowds. I´m talking about giving players a profile that comes from playing England on a regular basis to give those nations the chance to financially develope and commercially develope. 

Last time Scotland played England they were playing in front of 20,000 with 1,000,000 plus watching on FTA and a famous draw vs All Golds.. Since then they have had zero exposure. I´m just saying do it properly and give these nations a chance to be successful. 

I suspect we're in violent agreement, tbh, which is that there needs to be regular, scheduled in advance, organised international competitions.

I think there's a few things to say here, though.

Scotland has fewer clubs than say Serbia, Greece, Czechia, Malta and probably a few other countries in mainland Europe. If you're picking a Scottish team from domestic clubs, that's who they should be playing. I would consider the prospect of you or a clubmate potentially representing your country in Turkey or wherever as being quite an incentive for people to play or otherwise get involved. Creating teams comprised entirely of heritage players takes that away.

Scotland narrowly qualified for the 2016 four nations by wining the 2014 Euro Championships on points difference, after France lost in Ireland and then, having been 30 points up against Scotland, conceding three late tries. Scotland were the only team in the competition not to use any domestic players. Watching Scotland against Italy at Workington in the 2013 WC was a fantastic occasion, as was their game against NZ in 2016. But the reality is, they could pick Danny Brough, Lachlan Coote, Matty Russell and a handful of NRL players and that is not a sustainable situation. If you were to play England v Scotland today, without NRL players, it would be a three figure scoreline. The attendances for their games in 2016 four nations were 5337 against the Kangaroos and 6628 against NZ at Workington, so let's not run away with the idea that those games were huge commercial successes.

The European Cup/Championship that has been running on and off since 1934 seems to be the correct place for Scotland, Wales, Ireland and others to play, and presumably once Covid and the World Cup are over, the ERL will organise this again. I assume Scotland will organise one or more warm-up games for the WC next year too.

It's a shame that we don't have a well planned international calendar, but there's not actually much the RFL or the ERL can do about the fact that it will have been six years since the Aussies deigned to visit (assuming they actually turn up for the WC).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think, its (very) important that the results of these regular international fixtures are unpredictable at the kick off.

The (squash ladder type) Euro A, B, C, D model is a great idea, in my opinion.

This makes it a mouth-watering prospect for any/every one involved, players, fans and neutrals alike.

Without knowing who's going to win, everyone believes their team can win.

This keeps the pot boiling during the build up and right up until the final whistle.

These are games which can be promoted effectively, amongst rival fans even if, in the early days, they barely break-even. 

One sided affairs, like England v (anyone else other than France) just reveal to the uninitiated how little real competition exists for England in the NH. It also highlights the gulf in class. What's the point of that?

I'd much rather see Wales play Canada, USA, Jamaica and Brazil for the reasons mentioned above. 

Add in the potential excitement generated by the emergence of these new Nations and these games are really attractive prospects.

The incentive, for players to get involved (the chance to represent their country) is immense.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, fighting irish said:

I think, its (very) important that the results of these regular international fixtures are unpredictable at the kick off.

The (squash ladder type) Euro A, B, C, D model is a great idea, in my opinion.

This makes it a mouth-watering prospect for any/every one involved, players, fans and neutrals alike.

Without knowing who's going to win, everyone believes their team can win.

This keeps the pot boiling during the build up and right up until the final whistle.

These are games which can be promoted effectively, amongst rival fans even if, in the early days, they barely break-even. 

One sided affairs, like England v (anyone else other than France) just reveal to the uninitiated how little real competition exists for England in the NH. It also highlights the gulf in class. What's the point of that?

I'd much rather see Wales play Canada, USA, Jamaica and Brazil for the reasons mentioned above. 

Add in the potential excitement generated by the emergence of these new Nations and these games are really attractive prospects.

The incentive, for players to get involved (the chance to represent their country) is immense.  

So who do England play? After the indifference from the Aussies over the last few years, I'm not sure we can rely on any regular Southern hemisphere opposition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

So who do England play? After the indifference from the Aussies over the last few years, I'm not sure we can rely on any regular Southern hemisphere opposition.

I think you need to start somewhere and stick with it. Euro A, B, C etc - four teams in each with promotion/relegation for one team.

So that’s say Eng, Fra, Wal and Sco or Ire to start with. Yes England will storm it at first but as others have suggested you can also try and nudge help to the ‘minnows’ by England playing two of their group games away. Also gives other sides the incentive to keep in or they are relegated and ensures some level of quality by not having the 4 home  nations locked in for th sake of it. And then gives Spain, Greece etc opportunities too.

Pretty much every other sport does something similar to this. You’ve got to stick with it and commit which we never do.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, theswanmcr said:

I think you need to start somewhere and stick with it. Euro A, B, C etc - four teams in each with promotion/relegation for one team.

So that’s say Eng, Fra, Wal and Sco or Ire to start with. Yes England will storm it at first but as others have suggested you can also try and nudge help to the ‘minnows’ by England playing two of their group games away. Also gives other sides the incentive to keep in or they are relegated and ensures some level of quality by not having the 4 home  nations locked in for th sake of it. And then gives Spain, Greece etc opportunities too.

Pretty much every other sport does something similar to this. You’ve got to stick with it and commit which we never do.

 

I agree, but in the post I was quoting, the poster stated that England playing anyone other than France is a waste of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Odsal Outlaw said:

I did a search on a Jamaican newspaper to see if anything made the news over there. I found a preview altho it is written very poorly for a Jamaican audience, feels like a copy and paste of an English article. No results or match reports tho.

This was a Jamaican home game we’re told, feels like a poor effort all round from them on the promotional effort and can’t really see any link to the Jamaican National comp apart from a loose mention of their coach back home.

https://www.jamaicaobserver.com/sports/reggae-warriors-name-squad-to-face-scotland_234443

Check the Jamaica Gleaner (James Bond's paper of choice when in the Caribbean, one for the movie trivia fans!). Having said that, I'm having problems accessing their website today, which I wasn't on the weekend.

https://www.google.com/search?q=jamaica+gleaner+rugby+league&sxsrf=AOaemvKyDj1gs2LRMl3Ia1uBv3SHPJHz0g:1635239390778&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi16Im43efzAhVaPcAKHUG9DTcQ_AUoAXoECAEQAw&biw=1356&bih=624&dpr=1 

"We are easily breakable, by illness or falling, or a million other ways of leaving this earthly life. We are just so much mashed potato."  Don Estelle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, theswanmcr said:

I think you need to start somewhere and stick with it. Euro A, B, C etc - four teams in each with promotion/relegation for one team.

So that’s say Eng, Fra, Wal and Sco or Ire to start with. Yes England will storm it at first but as others have suggested you can also try and nudge help to the ‘minnows’ by England playing two of their group games away. Also gives other sides the incentive to keep in or they are relegated and ensures some level of quality by not having the 4 home  nations locked in for th sake of it. And then gives Spain, Greece etc opportunities too.

Pretty much every other sport does something similar to this. You’ve got to stick with it and commit which we never do.

 

So maybe initially it would make sense to have the knights play in this format, but then we need something the main English team can take part in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, dkw said:

So maybe initially it would make sense to have the knights play in this format, but then we need something the main English team can take part in. 

It’s got to be the ‘real’ England - Knight just devalues it.

Realistically if we come up with something like this then there will be drubbings for a few years. There’s no way round it other than not doing anything at all.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, theswanmcr said:

It’s got to be the ‘real’ England - Knight just devalues it.

Realistically if we come up with something like this then there will be drubbings for a few years. There’s no way round it other than not doing anything at all.

Completely agree. But at least if there's an end-of-season carrot to aim for (e.g. WC selection, Lions selection), then it would encourage more heritage players to put their hands up for the other home nations to make them more competitive. The last time Wales were remotely competitive with England was when they had heritage players like Iestyn Harris, Keiron Cunningham and Lee Briers playing for them. But they could also represent GB at that time, so weren't forced to opt for England in order to play in all the biggest games.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, theswanmcr said:

I think you need to start somewhere and stick with it. Euro A, B, C etc - four teams in each with promotion/relegation for one team.

So that’s say Eng, Fra, Wal and Sco or Ire to start with. Yes England will storm it at first but as others have suggested you can also try and nudge help to the ‘minnows’ by England playing two of their group games away. Also gives other sides the incentive to keep in or they are relegated and ensures some level of quality by not having the 4 home  nations locked in for th sake of it. And then gives Spain, Greece etc opportunities too.

Pretty much every other sport does something similar to this. You’ve got to stick with it and commit which we never do.

The reason why RL never sticks with things is probably lack of the money needed for that.  Those Nations League style tournaments will need funding, yet they won't generate much in the way of income so even breaking even could be difficult.  With the lack of money in the game that's a big obstacle.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Big Picture said:

The reason why RL never sticks with things is probably lack of the money needed for that.  Those Nations League style tournaments will need funding, yet they won't generate much in the way of income so even breaking even could be difficult.  With the lack of money in the game that's a big obstacle.

Totally agree but we need to be more creative and find funds somehow. Have we ever really pitched this idea to broadcasters and to play it over a few weekends that work for them? We need to package something up and offer it. Maybe there is no appetite, maybe the addition of Jamaica etc might be more appealing? Be more proactive and we might get somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, theswanmcr said:

Totally agree but we need to be more creative and find funds somehow. Have we ever really pitched this idea to broadcasters and to play it over a few weekends that work for them? We need to package something up and offer it. Maybe there is no appetite, maybe the addition of Jamaica etc might be more appealing? Be more proactive and we might get somewhere.

Seeing that the 2006 Federation Shield tournament was shown on TV, more than likely the idea has been pitched to broadcasters.  If a tournament with England, France, Tonga and Samoa didn't bring in the sort of money needed for it to continue, it seems unlikely that other similar tournaments would either.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

So who do England play? After the indifference from the Aussies over the last few years, I'm not sure we can rely on any regular Southern hemisphere opposition.

Well, it depends on how many games they want to play!

I'd suggest that the winners, of the tournament (squash ladder) each year, plays England once or twice.

In time, as the other's develop (due to the regular, even/unpredictable competition) England can be subsumed into the top 3 (or 4) division, of the squash ladder format.

Then it's a free for all.

The key thing, (for me) is that these preliminary games can be presented as even matches to partisan fans and neutrals alike, much less likely to produce humiliating and embarrassing (and possibly damaging) walk-overs, which merely serve to highlight the great gulf in class between England and the rest.

The incentive to get involved in our game, of the chance, for young sportspeople to represent their country against others cannot be overstated and is a very important piece of the development jigsaw, the world over.

The Euro RL seems to have started the thing off. We've got to start somewhere and keep it going.

I hope it goes from strength to strength.

I'd explore the possibility of a NH cup too every 4 years, between WC's. 

Edited by fighting irish
  • Like 2
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...