What to do about NH Rugby League

[gingerjon]

49 minutes ago, Eddie said:

There is plenty of evidence now that the Angles, Saxons and Jutes were invited not invaded, and that they assimilated with rather than the replaced the Romano-British population. 

History is nuanced but I think the evidence for assimilation is weak?

I'm reaching for long forgotten degree stuff here but I think there's not as much evidence for battles as might be expected but there's also not a lot of evidence of inter-marriage, cultural exchange, that sort of thing.

Whereas you can see cultural differences - and even appearance differences - between communities in what became the Celtic bit and what became the Anglo-Saxon bit?

(And, by the by, I think @Archie Gordon's link above should be a sticky for whenever anyone asks what a new club might need etc).

[RP London]

Just now, gingerjon said:

History is nuanced but I think the evidence for assimilation is weak?

I'm reaching for long forgotten degree stuff here but I think there's not as much evidence for battles as might be expected but there's also not a lot of evidence of inter-marriage, cultural exchange, that sort of thing.

Whereas you can see cultural differences - and even appearance differences - between communities in what became the Celtic bit and what became the Anglo-Saxon bit?

(And, by the by, I think @Archie Gordon's link above should be a sticky for whenever anyone asks what a new club might need etc).

It definitely wasn't "inter-marriage" or "cultural exchange" that I thought he meant.. 

[GeordieSaint]

3 hours ago, fighting irish said:

Who's writing the strategy? Do they know how to do it? Don't we want the strategy to be efficient, to achieve the most in the shortest possible time, with the minimum of wasted time, effort and expense? 

Each individual nation should have one. It should be written by them in conjunction with whichever region they work to/with and the IRL. And it should be realistic so whatever suits the realities they face with realistic endstates over a set period of time.

Edited November 3, 2022 by GeordieSaint

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Nearenough said:

when the english (angles) invaded the british isles the celtic britons were pushed back to what we now call cornwall, wales, northern scotland and western ireland. 

the islands were the british isles and remain so despite the immigration by the angles, saxons, norse (normans) etc

personally i preferred it when there was nothing.

The Britons and the Gaels were a separate people. Just compare Welsh to Irish and you can see the vast difference.

[gingerjon]

2 hours ago, NW10LDN said:

The Britons and the Gaels were a separate people. Just compare Welsh to Irish and you can see the vast difference.

Goidelic versus Brythonic, q-Celtic versus p-Celtic 

[Tommygilf]

4 hours ago, Eddie said:

There is plenty of evidence now that the Angles, Saxons and Jutes were invited not invaded, and that they assimilated with rather than the replaced the Romano-British population. 

There is elements of that, but numbers need to be considered here (or lack of them). 

To take an example from a few centuries later, the "Great Heathen Army" which invaded Northern England and took over 2 and a half of the 4 major Anglo-Saxon kingdoms was often thought to be rather large affair. Contemporary chronicles and their impact would have you think that it was at least 20,000 strong. Recent archaeological evidence now suggests it was less than 2000, with some even suggesting that the advance party that wintered in England numbered in the hundreds. 

The post 410 events in the entire British isles is an incredibly difficult web to fathom. What is clear is that Brythonic culture remained initially dominant in Cornwall, Wales and Strathclyde/Cumbria. The Picts of northern Scotland seem to have been totally subsumed into the Scotti realm of Dal Riata, which was formed by raiders and settlers from Ireland coming to what would become Scotland. The Saxons, Jutes and Angles seem to at least have been initially recruited to come over as mercenaries in the chaos, setting up their own dominions in the process. Hengest and Horsa are the famous two, but it is entirely possible that it was initially less migratory and more the importation of a warrior elite.

It is hard to use naming terms accurately because they often have different meanings now that would make their use seem anachronistic. For example as above, Scot referred for a long time to what we would call an Irishman; Northumbria (and by extension the north of "Angle-Land") referred to the kingdom between the Humber in the south to the Firth of Forth in the North; western and south-western Scotland along with Cumbria were one "brythonic" kingdom of Strathclyde, which only represents a fraction of that land now; England was named oddly by Saxons not Angles; and of course Wales comes from the Anglo-Saxon term for foreigners, though they knew the peoples there (and in Strathclyde) were derivations of the Cambrii (later Cymru), and yet the Irish call Wales to this day "little Britain"...

Britannia, Hibernia and Caledonia, if we're all Celts accepting Roman rule I suppose. 

[eal]

14 hours ago, fighting irish said:

Do you have any more information on how the Belgians achieved that rapid improvement?

By the way, I agree with you wholeheartedly.

I've often bemoaned the lack of a ''how to'' guide for people who aspire to set up new RL clubs in this country (and/or run a local/national league). We do have models of success we could base such a guide on, not least the North East of England, and Hemel Hempstead in the South. Such a document would be of great help to anyone who has ambitions to grow the game. No doubt, elements of the Belgian Hockey method could be incorporated into (and improve) such a document. 

At one time, the RFL had a National Development Manager (and a whole team of development officers) but his tenure was very short lived. This is the kind of thing he should have been charged with authoring and driving through.

In the absence of a professional department to push development, the ''how to'' guide would provide invaluable planning and implementation guidance for local league volunteers.

 

There is an interesting article here about the rise of Belgian hockey: https://www.theroar.com.au/2018/12/21/the-long-path-to-belgiums-ultimate-hockey-glory/ 

And another one here: https://www.newsclick.in/fih-mens-hockey-world-cup-alchemy-desire-belgiums-decade-long-journey-pinnacle

In ten years they went from 20,000 players to 48,000! What is clear from what I have read is that Belgium didn't set a 2 or 4 year gold. Back in 2006 they basically set a 15 year goal with clear long term planning - something that is likely beyond Rugby League.

 

[JohnM]

15 hours ago, Leonard said:

Do we have to do anything? 

Just floating it out there.

Yes, of course we have to do something. Our game would be nothing if it didn't keep chopping and changing according to the whims of a few posters,  rather than having a plan and sticking to it.

We play as England, not GB, not British Isles, not UK, not the outer arm of the Holy Roman Empire ( prop. Empress Ursula of Brussels).

So, yes, you are right. We don't have to do anything.

Edited November 4, 2022 by JohnM

[RP London]

11 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Goidelic versus Brythonic, q-Celtic versus p-Celtic 

Ooooh I sense another super league state of origin/war of the Roses thread coming on!!

[RP London]

55 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Yes, of course we have to do something. Our game would be nothing if it didn't keep chopping and changing according to the whims of a few posters,  rather than having a plan and sticking to it.

We play as England, not GB, not British Isles, not UK, not the outer arm of the Holy Roman Empire ( prop. Empress Ursula of Brussels).

So, yes, you are right. We don't have to do anything.

To be fair there's only really one person who had eripusly suggested going back to GB or GB&I the rest ofnusbhave gone down the rabbit hole of naming.. most of us are happy how it is, or at least accept it. 

The key is developing the other nations so England have some meaningful opposition from this side of the globe to make life easier and less dependent on our antipodean cousins 

[2blackrooks]

Speaking for Scotland we really need to focus on development and getting a regular league going, but needs support from our own SRL which really has little funding, Belgium hockey did it by a simple process of increased funding, better infrastructure and increased training, but where does the money come from.
We have development days for our U16 up through to u20 and the kids turn up but there is nothing beyond turning up. No real games to think about. 
We could easily get games for these kids against Wales Ireland England then look at games against Yorkshire Lancashire Cumbria even France, this would typically give a 14 game season (H & A) and hopefully they can filter into the league teams even catch the eye of the Cumbrian teams.

Its also imperative that we build and include a U20 team for the World Cup in 2025

Scotland had a disastrous WC but I blame this on poor prep, we should have had a game in the mid season break plus a couple of games just prior to the Italy game. Evan if we played a Cumbria in this period,  I don’t believe the managers are experienced enough for international level RL (not wanting them sacked but bring in more experience to help out) but also believe against Italy their wasn’t enough passion for playing for the shirt, but certainly improved against Fiji. 
I would like to see SRL bring in experienced coaches to work with the kids and clubs and help out the current management 

More international game’s obviously 

For RL to have a chance we need local lads playing for Scotland so the nation can relate to them, heritage players are great meantime and if you look at the WC squad we Have 12 English born players 3 came through the Scottish system 9 Southern hemisphere players and 3 home grown players 
RL is never going to be popular but RU players do like playing RL and the SRU are doing there best to alienate club rugby in Scotland, The SRL could focus on getting some of these lads swapping codes, only if we got development officers in place and a fully supported league organised, but we need some cash, 

[crashmon]

Yea, my point when I started this thread was not so much about England (really not sure how the thread morphed into the GB and Ireland discussion), but more on what can be done in the NH to make the gap between NH and SH (apart from England) smaller (and I don't mean by levelling down the SH teams).

I would really love to see France in the 2025 WC QF being competitive vs NZ or England,but right now I don't even see them getting out of the group, and wales / scotland even further behind.

I also think having a stronger France would benifit England (and potentially wales etc as well)

 

Edited November 4, 2022 by crashmon

[Big Picture]

24 minutes ago, crashmon said:

Yea, my point when I started this thread was not so much about England (really not sure how the thread morphed into the GB and Ireland discussion), but more on what can be done in the NH to make the gap between NH and SH (apart from England) smaller (and I don't mean by levelling down the SH teams).

I would really love to see France in the 2025 WC QF being competitive vs NZ or England,but right now I don't even see them getting out of the group, and wales / scotland even further behind.

I also think having a stronger France would benifit England (and potentially wales etc as well)

 

In the end it comes down to money doesn't it.  The game needs more money so it can offer players more and thereby get more and better players wanting to play it and reach the top level too.  The financial crunch hitting RU could help as they have to cut back as result, but not if RL doesn't pay enough to appeal to the players affected by those cuts.

[gingerjon]

30 minutes ago, crashmon said:

Yea, my point when I started this thread was not so much about England (really not sure how the thread morphed into the GB and Ireland discussion), but more on what can be done in the NH to make the gap between NH and SH (apart from England) smaller (and I don't mean by levelling down the SH teams).

I would really love to see France in the 2025 WC QF being competitive vs NZ or England,but right now I don't even see them getting out of the group, and wales / scotland even further behind.

I also think having a stronger France would benifit England (and potentially wales etc as well)

 

The answer cannot be: play England a lot.

Simply because, being blunt, England don't have the time and can't afford to be playing a game each against Wales, Ireland, Scotland, France, Serbia, Ukraine every year.

So, pragmatically, and however much it damages the pride of many other countries, England's involvement can really only usually be Knights/Community Lions, link ups with clubs for resources and expertise, and supporting organisations like ERL. Anything else and it's stretched too thin.

And then the 'answer' for each country will be massively different but, ultimately, I think ERL have it right at an international representative level with their idea for a structured, ongoing Championship where nations can find their level.

Domestically? The Belgium hockey example is based around a decades-long strategy and financial investment aligned with patience. I'm not sure any country will have a magic bullet that differs from that at a top line level.

[nadera78]

17 hours ago, RP London said:

I saw that and assumed it was a different person.. is he the guy at school that everyone hated as he was great at loads of sports and probably a really nice bloke too (even though you want him to be a tw@)... 

Yes think so.. a bit like the early GB Olympic Ice hockey teams if memory serves.

I think most of the players on GB's 1936 Olympic Gold medal winning team were born in Britain. Maybe 2 or 3 born in Canada. But almost all of them had grown up and learnt to play hockey over there. Caused a bit of a stink with the Canadians when we beat them.

[crashmon]

2 hours ago, gingerjon said:

The answer cannot be: play England a lot.

Simply because, being blunt, England don't have the time and can't afford to be playing a game each against Wales, Ireland, Scotland, France, Serbia, Ukraine every year.

So, pragmatically, and however much it damages the pride of many other countries, England's involvement can really only usually be Knights/Community Lions, link ups with clubs for resources and expertise, and supporting organisations like ERL. Anything else and it's stretched too thin.

And then the 'answer' for each country will be massively different but, ultimately, I think ERL have it right at an international representative level with their idea for a structured, ongoing Championship where nations can find their level.

Domestically? The Belgium hockey example is based around a decades-long strategy and financial investment aligned with patience. I'm not sure any country will have a magic bullet that differs from that at a top line level.

I think France are close enough that we (England) should be playing them mid-season every year instead of the completely pointless combined nations.

But I don't think the other countries are close enough although yearly games v knights could help.

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, crashmon said:

I think France are close enough that we (England) should be playing them mid-season every year instead of the completely pointless combined nations.

But I don't think the other countries are close enough although yearly games v knights could help.

I'd really rather be playing a proper country as opposed to the Combined Nations and, right now, it makes sense for that to be France.

 

[JohnM]

7 hours ago, RP London said:

To be fair there's only really one person who had eripusly suggested going back to GB or GB&I the rest of us have gone down the rabbit hole of naming.. most of us are happy how it is, or at least accept it. 

The key is developing the other nations so England have some meaningful opposition from this side of the globe to make life easier and less dependent on our antipodean cousins 

Understood.  Probably in a minority of one, here, but what I'd like to see is a world governing body of the sport Call it something like WRL - World Rugby League), tasked with setting and monitoring the rules of the game, and working with all countries to help develop the game. This France would be responsible for agreeing the objective, strategy and tactics for developing the game in France just as Scotland would be responsible for agreeing the objective, strategy and tactics for developing the game in Scotland, all to a template common across all nations, with the world governing body directing finance distribution, Internationals etc. 

It'll never happen though. 

[RP London]

37 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Understood.  Probably in a minority of one, here, but what I'd like to see is a world governing body of the sport Call it something like WRL - World Rugby League), tasked with setting and monitoring the rules of the game, and working with all countries to help develop the game. This France would be responsible for agreeing the objective, strategy and tactics for developing the game in France just as Scotland would be responsible for agreeing the objective, strategy and tactics for developing the game in Scotland, all to a template common across all nations, with the world governing body directing finance distribution, Internationals etc. 

It'll never happen though. 

I think many of us would like to see that..  

[crashmon]

Situation is now even more serious, the one thing we had was England at least in with a chance. Now the humiliation of losing to Samoa in the semi final means that the chance of the likes of AUS and NZ coming up to play in tours even less possibilty.

When Aus put 40 on Samoa next week, this will just be final nail

[frank]

20 minutes ago, crashmon said:

Situation is now even more serious, the one thing we had was England at least in with a chance. Now the humiliation of losing to Samoa in the semi final means that the chance of the likes of AUS and NZ coming up to play in tours even less possibilty.

When Aus put 40 on Samoa next week, this will just be final nail

You seem to o/look that Australia lost to Tonga. The best team won today and won't  be the last time these upsets occur.

[Midlands hobo]

Bin SL create franchises like the nrl/NFL. Put 1 in the borders 2 in France 1 in Wales and Ireland and 5 in England.

The my club deserves a license yours doesn't I'm picking up my ball and going home attitude needs to stop. Club RL in the nh is killing itself.

[Damien]

5 minutes ago, Midlands hobo said:

Bin SL create franchises like the nrl/NFL. Put 1 in the borders 2 in France 1 in Wales and Ireland and 5 in England.

The my club deserves a license yours doesn't I'm picking up my ball and going home attitude needs to stop. Club RL in the nh is killing itself.

And who pays for all this?

The Scottish Borders is also about a fifth of the population of Cumbria with zero RL,  what a success that'll be.

[Midlands hobo]

3 minutes ago, Damien said:

And who pays for all this?

The Scottish Borders is also about a fifth of the population of Cumbria with zero RL,  what a success that'll be.

Top down works. Crusaders were top down and within a decade Wales were in the 4 nations and putting players into SL clubs. Since they went it's slipped away again 

[Damien]

23 minutes ago, Midlands hobo said:

Top down works. Crusaders were top down and within a decade Wales were in the 4 nations and putting players into SL clubs. Since they went it's slipped away again 

That's nothing to do with what I posted.