Rework of IRL/RLWC

[rlno1]

2 hours ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

The All Blacks batter fully pro international sides all of the time. Their excellence is celebrated, their skills appreciated. 
 

This isn’t WWE, we don’t get to map everything out into comeback stories, nail-biting victories or underdog surprises. We get to enjoy and celebrate elite athletes, and occasional blow-outs are a small price to pay to enable smaller countries to aspire to play in a tournament with the best players in the world. Let’s keep some perspective, and have enough confidence in ourselves and our sport to allow things like last nights game to happen. 

Agree totally. The All Blacks are praised and admired yet have NEVER lost a first round game, winning ALL 31 matches, scoring 1845 to 358 at an average of 60-12.

Results included scores of 

145

108

101

91

85

83

79

76

74

71

70 x 2

[Tommygilf]

16 teams is here to stay, if nothing else precisely because we now are heading towards a stage where we can genuinely see groups where 3 teams all believe they can qualify for the quarters. We're not that far off having 4 teams in some groups. 

We play so little international Rugby League. The world cup cannot and should not be cut back. I'm delighted that the Junior WC is being added to France 2025 too.

[Harry Stottle]

Let me just say when @Martyn Sadlerdelivered his own structure for the whole of the Rugby League in whereas the top clubs in SL would be playing against the bottom teams in League 1 it was treated with repulsion and derision from most people on this site, and especially a lot of those who are championing the present World Cup Format.

But is this format any different in principle to Martyn's suggestion, realistically in this present World Cup we could have 16 teams that resemble our domestic league structure, 5 of SL status, 6 of Championship status and 5 who would be representative of League 1 clubs.

Granted we will see some very good games when teams of equal abillity not of the top status play each other (as we can watching Community clubs compete) but should mismatches such as last night be necessary? to us who are well versed in the sport we know and can see the intracsies of the game, but as a competition that is broadcast on national TV is it really representative of the sport and does it present in the way it should.

As I said very early in the Aus v Scotland thread last night, we should have 6 invitees to a finals series and 2 further qualifiers, so as to make the games more competitive and yes there would be fewer to attend but it should produce more of an appetite to be there.

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

We play so little international Rugby League. The world cup cannot and should not be cut back. 

This is absolutely the core argument.

If we cut the World Cup back then experience tells us it won't be replaced like for like.

It really would be cutting back international RL.

[Tommygilf]

4 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Let me just say when @Martyn Sadlerdelivered his own structure for the whole of the Rugby League in whereas the top clubs in SL would be playing against the bottom teams in League 1 it was treated with repulsion and derision from most people on this site, and especially a lot of those who are championing the present World Cup Format.

But is this format any different in principle to Martyn's suggestion, realistically in this present World Cup we could have 16 teams that resemble our domestic league structure, 5 of SL status, 6 of Championship status and 5 who would be representative of League 1 clubs.

Granted we will see some very good games when teams of equal abillity not of the top status play each other (as we can watching Community clubs compete) but should mismatches such as last night be necessary? to us who are well versed in the sport we know and can see the intracsies of the game, but as a competition that is broadcast on national TV is it really representative of the sport and does it present in the way it should.

As I said very early in the Aus v Scotland thread last night, we should have 6 invitees to a finals series and 2 further qualifiers, so as to make the games more competitive and yes there would be fewer to attend but it should produce more of an appetite to be there.

Why play less when we play so little anyway?

This is a world cup. People don't expect the same as of regular league matches - particularly in the group stages. Martyn's lunatic idea would have repeatedly pitted the proverbial Scotland against Australia, twice a year at least, every year. That's objectively lunacy.

The world cup is once every 4 years, and as with every world cup in every sport, some teams are contenders to win, some are unknown quantities, and some are just happy to be there. All comers are fine if they have qualified. 

[Jughead]

“We want more international rugby league!”

”How do we want it?”

”Not like that”. 

Rugby League fans, eh? Who needs enemies, with friends like ours. 

 

[Jughead]

Fiji to go first. 170-6 over the past three tournaments in games. Shocking, we don’t need professional players in the biggest league on the planet putting up performances like that. 

[Tommygilf]

7 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

This is absolutely the core argument.

If we cut the World Cup back then experience tells us it won't be replaced like for like.

It really would be cutting back international RL.

Absolutely.

We got rid of the 4 Nations after 2016. How many years did it take to get the Oceania Cup up and running? And outside of World Cups, how many times have (non-England) northern hemisphere nations played NZ or Australia or indeed any other Pacific Island team? Frankly, how many times have they played England too?

[gingerjon]

Just now, Jughead said:

“We want more international rugby league!”

”How do we want it?”

”Not like that”. 

Rugby League fans, eh? Who needs enemies, with friends like ours. 

 

I'll repeat what I said on the Scotland RL 'rebuild' thread.

There are no shortcuts here. It will all be hard work and not everything will come off for the better.

A 16 team World Cup guarantees every nation three games and means the winner has played six. I think that gives the tournament the shape and gravitas it needs.

There will be massive blowouts along the way. They happen.

Heck, I've just seen the draw for next year's FIFA WWC and there are going to be some 10+ to nil games in the group stages and possibly in the first knock outs.

[Damien]

58 minutes ago, SydneyRoosters said:

Are you joking, I know for a fact that I have much more Knowledge than 99% of people on this forum. I know all the ins and outs of all 34 Nations in rugby league. I’ve watched all of the players from the lowers nations play domestically in lower grades and internationally,  and I have been following all the those nations 5+ years, even a lot longer for some. I’ve watched Jamaican domestic games this season, USA, Serbian Games, Dutch Domestic Games and just about all the available rugby league to watch. I know for a fact I have much for a grasp than you about International rugby league mate.

Phoinex Venom never even existed so don’t know why you’ve got as your profile picture.

If you don’t believe me quiz me on anything, not even being cocky but I know a lot more than you so don’t go going out making claims about people you don’t know.

Sorry mate, I've liked many of your posts since you joined this forum but that's embarrassing.

[Harry Stottle]

9 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Why play less when we play so little anyway?

This is a world cup. People don't expect the same as of regular league matches - particularly in the group stages. Martyn's lunatic idea would have repeatedly pitted the proverbial Scotland against Australia, twice a year at least, every year. That's objectively lunacy.

The world cup is once every 4 years, and as with every world cup in every sport, some teams are contenders to win, some are unknown quantities, and some are just happy to be there. All comers are fine if they have qualified. 

So basically the WC is a jamboree?

"Why play less when we play so little anyway" it all depends on what quality you want to put up with Tommy, In comparrison I would sooner spend a lot more on say a 5* Holiday knowing full well I would be recieving the luxury I am paying for other than speculating on two or three holidays in 2* hotels in the hope that they may be OK, but each to their own.

[SydneyRoosters]

11 minutes ago, Damien said:

Sorry mate, I've liked many of your posts since you joined this forum but that's embarrassing.

Embarrassing to defend myself, God what has the world come too .

[Harry Stottle]

18 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Absolutely.

We got rid of the 4 Nations after 2016. How many years did it take to get the Oceania Cup up and running? And outside of World Cups, how many times have (non-England) northern hemisphere nations played NZ or Australia or indeed any other Pacific Island team? Frankly, how many times have they played England too?

And had Covid not happened there was an International programme in place, but don't let that fact alter your argument.

[Tommygilf]

2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

So basically the WC is a jamboree?

"Why play less when we play so little anyway" it all depends on what quality you want to put up with Tommy, In comparrison I would sooner spend a lot more on say a 5* Holiday knowing full well I would be recieving the luxury I am paying for other than speculating on two or three holidays in 2* hotels in the hope that they may be OK, but each to their own.

Of course the World Cup is a jamboree; particularly in the group stages. 

For all that you would like to guarantee "quality" Harry, the past 2 World Cup finals have seen the losing side not even score a single try. In this world cup, Wales were all but written off against the Cook Islands whereas Samoa were likely going to beat England, which was the better game in the end? 

It's swings and roundabouts.

[Tommygilf]

5 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

And had Covid not happened there was an International programme in place, but don't let that fact alter your argument.

Yeah, an ashes tour of Australia vs England, further proving the point!

[Harry Stottle]

8 minutes ago, Damien said:

Sorry mate, I've liked many of your posts since you joined this forum but that's embarrassing.

You know what they say Damien, "If you believe you have got it flaunt it"

Rooster has given an open invitation to be tested on his knowledge, try him it should make for good reading!

[Jughead]

1 hour ago, SydneyRoosters said:

Are you joking, I know for a fact that I have much more Knowledge than 99% of people on this forum. I know all the ins and outs of all 34 Nations in rugby league. I’ve watched all of the players from the lowers nations play domestically in lower grades and internationally,  and I have been following all the those nations 5+ years, even a lot longer for some. I’ve watched Jamaican domestic games this season, USA, Serbian Games, Dutch Domestic Games and just about all the available rugby league to watch. I know for a fact I have much for a grasp than you about International rugby league mate.

Phoinex Venom never even existed so don’t know why you’ve got as your profile picture.

The past couple of days on here have been special. This self fellatio shouldn’t be missed. 

[Tommygilf]

7 minutes ago, SydneyRoosters said:

Embarrassing to defend myself. What has the world come too .

Nah mate its embarrassing to say you have "more knowledge than 99% of people on this forum."

[SydneyRoosters]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

Nah mate its embarrassing to say you have "more knowledge than 99% of people on this forum."

Ok, Not to trying to be cocky but I’m sure I do, It’s called confidence.

[Tommygilf]

2 minutes ago, SydneyRoosters said:

Ok, Not to trying to be cocky but I’m sure I do, It’s called confidence.

Well I suggest you consider your phrasing and choice of words then, because on here at least, coming across as cocky (which you are doing) will receive ridicule.

As an aside, I've known plenty of people who were confidently wrong. Confidence is no guarantee of accuracy.

[SydneyRoosters]

4 minutes ago, Jughead said:

The past couple of days on here have been special. This self fellatio shouldn’t be missed. 

Are people not allowed to be confident these days, Obviously you’ve never met me but I know that, I know a lot and I mean a lot about rugby league. Someone criticised me stating “I didn’t know about any top nations outside the top 10” so I defended myself, Hardly “Self Fellatio”

[SydneyRoosters]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

Well I suggest you consider your phrasing and choice of words then, because on here at least, coming across as cocky (which you are doing) will receive ridicule.

As an aside, I've known plenty of people who were confidently wrong. Confidence is no guarantee of accuracy.

I don’t mean to sound cocky sorry, it’s hard to portray words through text. Just trying to defend myself and tell him I know a lot about rugby league which is very hard to do without coming across cocky.

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, SydneyRoosters said:

I don’t mean to sound cocky sorry, it’s hard to portray words through text. Just trying to defend myself and tell him I know a lot about rugby league which is very hard to do without coming across cocky.

Probably a good place to start is to just state your credentials then let others decide if you "have more knowledge than 99% of this forum", rather than saying it yourself.

[Harry Stottle]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

Of course the World Cup is a jamboree; particularly in the group stages. 

For all that you would like to guarantee "quality" Harry, the past 2 World Cup finals have seen the losing side not even score a single try. In this world cup, Wales were all but written off against the Cook Islands whereas Samoa were likely going to beat England, which was the better game in the end? 

It's swings and roundabouts.

Now you are bringing your football expierence into play Tommy in respect of no tries being scored, I can well imagine that football matches devoid of goals being scored are very sombre affairs but in my expierience over many years I have been witness to a good number of games that have been defence orientated and they have been as good as any games I have ever had the pleasure of watching.

But yes, the Cook Islands was the better game, and the England v Samoa game turned out to be a damp squib as a contest, but there is very much the likelihood that those games could be reversed, would you expect Aus v Scotland, to be any different and the other mismatches that we will probably - no, that will accur - in the next 2 rounds?

 

[Harry Stottle]

10 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I've known plenty of people who were confidently wrong. Confidence is no guarantee of accuracy.

Quite Fraudian Tommy, I like that, is it you own?