The Kangaroos brand has been wasted & thrown away

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

5 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

The internationalists must respect that the NRL will accomodate little that has a high chance of compromising their main products.

Yes this is the tricky issue for the global game. The NRL has positioned itself similarly to the likes of the NFL, NBA, NHL etc - i.e. as the figurehead competition for the sport. Whilst there are internationals played in those sports, the club game is regarded as the highest level of competition. That isn't the case with the NRL - it isn't a higher standard than England vs NZ or Australia. Latrell Mitchell is not a global star in the way that somebody like Lebron James is.

The rest of the RL playing world needs the Kangaroos to give credibility to the international competitions, so this is why people are disappointed/frustrated with the NRL's stance regarding the wider international game.

[Sports Prophet]

1 minute ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

Yes this is the tricky issue for the global game. The NRL has positioned itself similarly to the likes of the NFL, NBA, NHL etc - i.e. as the figurehead competition for the sport. Whilst there are internationals played in those sports, the club game is regarded as the highest level of competition. That isn't the case with the NRL - it isn't a higher standard than England vs NZ or Australia. Latrell Mitchell is not a global star in the way that somebody like Lebron James is.

The rest of the RL playing world needs the Kangaroos to give credibility to the international competitions, so this is why people are disappointed/frustrated with the NRL's stance regarding the wider international game.

I get what you are saying, but as far as I am concerned, the Panthers of 2022 would beat any of these international sides. 

More pertinent, in a purely hypothetical competition of these 16 nations and the 16 NRL sides, I envisage the 16 NRL teams to finish in the top 20. With that in mind, I would say the NRL is the highest level of competition, not the international game.

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

2 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

I get what you are saying, but as far as I am concerned, the Panthers of 2022 would beat any of these international sides. 

More pertinent, in a purely hypothetical competition of these 16 nations and the 16 NRL sides, I envisage the 16 NRL teams to finish in the top 20. With that in mind, I would say the NRL is the highest level of competition, not the international game.

That same argument could be made for the FIFA World Cup as well, but that doesn't render that competition meaningless. Whilst there will always be year-to-year fluctuations in quality of teams, there's no way a game like the 2017 World Cup Final was a lower standard of competition than the NRL that year. 

The point I was making was that if the USA put together their best possible teams at American Football, for example, they would be absolutely pulverising the next best country. In recent years, that hasn't been the case for Australia (e.g. most recent games against England, Tonga and NZ have all been competitive as opposed to complete wipeouts). Another longstanding problem the international RL game has is that the second tier of teams is miles off the level of the big guns, as evidence by the blowouts in the current World Cup.

[Sports Prophet]

6 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

That same argument could be made for the FIFA World Cup as well, but that doesn't render that competition meaningless. Whilst there will always be year-to-year fluctuations in quality of teams, there's no way a game like the 2017 World Cup Final was a lower standard of competition than the NRL that year. 

The point I was making was that if the USA put together their best possible teams at American Football, for example, they would be absolutely pulverising the next best country. In recent years, that hasn't been the case for Australia (e.g. most recent games against England, Tonga and NZ have all been competitive as opposed to complete wipeouts). Another longstanding problem the international RL game has is that the second tier of teams is miles off the level of the big guns, as evidence by the blowouts in the current World Cup.

I’ve never claimed this tournament or the right internationals to be meaningless.

Apart from that, you will find I agree with everything you say. I’m enjoying this game so far though.

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

2 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

I’ve never claimed this tournament or the right internationals to be meaningless.

That's fair - apologies for projecting that on to you

3 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

I’ve never claimed this tournament or the right internationals to be meaningless.

Apart from that, you will find I agree with everything you say. I’m enjoying this game so far though.

Yup. This has been a good 'un so far.

[IM2]

6 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

The club game is the best vehicle to grow the sport, not internationals. That said, it’s not one or the other either.

so wrong. look at the impact of the WC on union. everything builds to it. without the international game union couldn't afford the club game it has.

[IM2]

2 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

Quick @IM2, I’m ready to make that bet before this pitiful Q Final crowd is announced.

still not convinced. the hull crowd looked better. lets see

[Sports Prophet]

1 hour ago, IM2 said:

so wrong. look at the impact of the WC on union. everything builds to it. without the international game union couldn't afford the club game it has.

Is union the only sport you put us against? 
look at the impact of soccer, cricket, basketball, ice hockey. 

[IM2]

1 hour ago, Sports Prophet said:

Is union the only sport you put us against? 
look at the impact of soccer, cricket, basketball, ice hockey. 

yeah and soccer has a great WC but under pinned by massive regional tournaments as well, cricket the same, basketball has the olympics as does hockey. so whats your point. mine is you need these tournaments to under pin the game not club level alone.

[UTK]

13 hours ago, Jughead said:

I don’t disagree about Australia but what about England? They’ve played two nations in this country since the 2017 final defeat. That number should be higher but they decided to bring back the GB brand at a very odd time.I know there’s some reasoning behind this that is out of their control but that’s not really good enough and rumours of New Zealand coming over again next year isn’t the most appetising, either. 

Tonga’s rise, as well as the improvement in PNG and the side Samoa can put out on the field, hasn’t been capitalised on by England, either. Many say Tonga v England was one of their favourite games and those that were there wax lyrical about it, why haven’t we gone back for more and hit them over here? If we can’t get 60-75,000 over three games against Tonga, we’re in major trouble. 

No arguments from me about the failings of England in relation to the international game, their stance was made abundantly clear when the Exiles/Combined Nations was revived - if it ain't AUS/NZ then England doesn't want any part in it, especially when supporting the rest of Europe is concerned.

Saving grace on England's behalf is if they can finally win the WC with this quality side they've got now, decades of no competition from England set the international game back a long way. A Tongan win against Australia followed by an England (or Tongan) WC win over AUS/NZ should help to re-engage the momentum that was being built from 2017-2019.

[RippinandTearin]

On 05/11/2022 at 11:24, IM2 said:

Have to say that crowd tonight at Hudds shows how far the Kangaroos brand has fallen. Years gone by people would have turned out just to watch legends and giants of the game. Yes they are still probably the worlds best but their disregard for the international game & unwillingness to invest proper time and energy into has led to this. A state v state game is seen as their be all and end all. Yes its great and I love it but it means they turn up for the sake of it. In many ways the game should move on without them. It didnt in the past as they were a massive draw, the biggest! well tonight proves that wrong. shame really. 

What a load of ###### that Australia doesn’t invest in the international game, you only have to look at the pacific island nations, how are the European countries going that you could invest in? 
Great Britain (England) played in Australia 6 times since 2000

Australia visited UK 9 times since 2000

England test record 20 yrs vs Aust is 12 games 12 losses, 

27 WCC played since 1976, 4 in Aus & 23 in the UK

can we do much more? You people over there seem to think Rugby League has this fantastic rails run in the sporting world of Australia but you don’t understand how many professional sports, teams etc there are all vying for juniors, sponsorship & airtime, it’s more precarious than you imagine & somewhat volatile, it tends to change around quite a bit, we have a real need over here to maintain & grow the game, it’s not as easy as you think to just do more & more for the rugby league world 

[RippinandTearin]

18 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I thought this way back in 2016 4 nations when we got 10k less than just a year before in the same venue vs the kiwis.

The Kangaroos aren't the draw they once were. They don't play. People don't know who they are. If they do, many just assume they will win easy anyway.

The apathy, particularly in the past decade towards the Kangaroos has been nothing short of a travesty for the sport.

In your mind I’d suggest you’re talking about that golden era of full Kangaroo tours, that caught the publics eye given they played twice a week & against many club teams

That just isn’t going to happen anymore as much as we bemoan it’s passing in both hemispheres, with the advent of full time professionalism it changed everything, players became fitter, bigger, more explosive & the thought of that big a tour at the end of a season would be flatly refused by most players, I’d suggest the modern man is probably more involved with the kids etc these days & partners & wives less submissive, I’m sure most partners wouldn’t be waving them away for month on end at the end of an arduous season without threats of divorce 

The players union etc would be more involved in workload bearing, things like rest from head knocks make tours more problematic

I’m sure many players would drop out, many did from the World Cup  

[RippinandTearin]

18 hours ago, UTK said:

As the others have correctly pointed out it didn't stop other sports and didn't even stop our sport with Origin, there's no defence for 2018 or not at the very least running a reduced calendar during the pandemic - the Kangaroos didn't play for over 1000 days, absolutely disgraceful.

I will note that I don't think it is a coincidence we've seen a different trajectory since V'landys was installed as head of the ARLC, not only was there zero effort to hold a match during/post-pandemic but we're also now gutting some of the good work that was done in establishing the mid-season tests as a consistent fixture in the calendar.

Jesus I’m sick of people blaming Vlandys for everything, there hasn’t been an important administrator in the game for the last 20-30 years that the media & public haven’t cannibalised, it’s intensified with the advent of social media & mass media online too

Who'd want to do the job with the way we treat them? 

[RippinandTearin]

18 hours ago, gingerjon said:

*leaving all politics outside of it*

The spending power of most people in the UK has massively dropped over the past decade and is getting significantly worse now in the midst of eye-watering inflation and rate rises. Aspects of this are present elsewhere around the world, possibly in Australia, but the UK appears to be more negatively impacted than pretty much anywhere else.

*on 'working class'*

It's a very broad term. For various historical reasons of geography, rugby league tends to be in the working class areas with less money to begin with.

There’s just less class disparity in Australia, nobody mentions class much, nobody accepts any real divide & there’s a very dominant, large “middle ground (class)” 

[UTK]

47 minutes ago, RippinandTearin said:

Jesus I’m sick of people blaming Vlandys for everything, there hasn’t been an important administrator in the game for the last 20-30 years that the media & public haven’t cannibalised, it’s intensified with the advent of social media & mass media online too

Who'd want to do the job with the way we treat them? 

Really not sure what you're trying to say here, as head of the ARLC and Abdo as CEO of the NRL these are the blokes who literally made the decisions that are being discussed here. 

Are we meant to pretend some figure that doesn't exist made these decisions so you can feel a little less offended on V'landys behalf? Really unsure of the relevance of your comments, are we not allowed to criticise or discuss the inputs of administrators?

[Sports Prophet]

2 hours ago, IM2 said:

yeah and soccer has a great WC but under pinned by massive regional tournaments as well, cricket the same, basketball has the olympics as does hockey. so whats your point. mine is you need these tournaments to under pin the game not club level alone.

My point is that in all those sports I noted, the capitalist nature of a League is far more lucrative and of public consciousness than the socialist international version of the sport.

Do not expect the two ideologies of capitalism and socialism to co-operate any time soon.

[Tommygilf]

4 hours ago, RippinandTearin said:

In your mind I’d suggest you’re talking about that golden era of full Kangaroo tours, that caught the publics eye given they played twice a week & against many club teams

That just isn’t going to happen anymore as much as we bemoan it’s passing in both hemispheres, with the advent of full time professionalism it changed everything, players became fitter, bigger, more explosive & the thought of that big a tour at the end of a season would be flatly refused by most players, I’d suggest the modern man is probably more involved with the kids etc these days & partners & wives less submissive, I’m sure most partners wouldn’t be waving them away for month on end at the end of an arduous season without threats of divorce 

The players union etc would be more involved in workload bearing, things like rest from head knocks make tours more problematic

I’m sure many players would drop out, many did from the World Cup  

I'm not old enough to have experienced that. My point was rather that the Kangaroos have gone from playing regular matches to being a team that could "happily" not play for years at a time.

[RippinandTearin]

4 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I'm not old enough to have experienced that. My point was rather that the Kangaroos have gone from playing regular matches to being a team that could "happily" not play for years at a time.

Expand  

Great Britain (England) played in Australia 6 times since 2000

Australia visited UK 9 times since 2000

England test record 20 yrs vs Aust is 12 games 12 losses, 

27 WCC played since 1976, 4 in Aus & 23 in the UK

[Tommygilf]

4 minutes ago, RippinandTearin said:

 

Expand  

Great Britain (England) played in Australia 6 times since 2000

Australia visited UK 9 times since 2000

England test record 20 yrs vs Aust is 12 games 12 losses, 

27 WCC played since 1976, 4 in Aus & 23 in the UK

Ok, I'm not entirely sure of the relevance of any of that?

[Gomersall]

2 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Ok, I'm not entirely sure of the relevance of any of that?

I understand where RT is coming from regarding which country has toured the other the most but the WCC figures are distorted because the Aussie teams are not usually interested in hosting the game as they see it as a hard sell. They’d sooner take the guaranteed payment they receive for playing in England 

[Cowardly Fan]

11 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

My point is that in all those sports I noted, the capitalist nature of a League is far more lucrative and of public consciousness than the socialist international version of the sport.

Do not expect the two ideologies of capitalism and socialism to co-operate any time soon.

This isn't true in football.  The World Cup has about 25% higher revenue than the Champions League with higher viewing figures, despite fewer games.  Some of the national leagues would have more over a season, but that's only because there are several times more games, on a per game basis international is much bigger.  

Also think you're confused about captialist/socialist claim.  FIFA is no more socialist than UEFA or the Premier League.  

Edited November 6, 2022 by Cowardly Fan

[Tommygilf]

11 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

My point is that in all those sports I noted, the capitalist nature of a League is far more lucrative and of public consciousness than the socialist international version of the sport.

Do not expect the two ideologies of capitalism and socialism to co-operate any time soon.

Australian shows total lack of knowledge about football, shock...

[RippinandTearin]

59 minutes ago, Gomersall said:

I understand where RT is coming from regarding which country has toured the other the most but the WCC figures are distorted because the Aussie teams are not usually interested in hosting the game as they see it as a hard sell. They’d sooner take the guaranteed payment they receive for playing in England 

I don’t know if that’s the case, & I really don’t think too many clubs are all that excited about travelling to England in what is traditionally their “trial period” pre season

The game would sell well enough in Australia, they wouldn’t lose money, I’m sure Penrith vs St Helen’s would be well lucrative enough & the minimal disruption pretty attractive

no, I think Australian clubs do the right thing & promote the game, much to your disappointment 

[MatthewWoody]

19 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

I get what you are saying, but as far as I am concerned, the Panthers of 2022 would beat any of these international sides. 

More pertinent, in a purely hypothetical competition of these 16 nations and the 16 NRL sides, I envisage the 16 NRL teams to finish in the top 20. With that in mind, I would say the NRL is the highest level of competition, not the international game.

Except Eng, NZ and Aus imho.

[Gomersall]

16 minutes ago, RippinandTearin said:

I don’t know if that’s the case, & I really don’t think too many clubs are all that excited about travelling to England in what is traditionally their “trial period” pre season

The game would sell well enough in Australia, they wouldn’t lose money, I’m sure Penrith vs St Helen’s would be well lucrative enough & the minimal disruption pretty attractive

no, I think Australian clubs do the right thing & promote the game, much to your disappointment 

Why do you think I’m disappointed? Please explain to me why the WCC doesn’t alternate between England and Australia. The English clubs have offered to go Down Under many times. If Leeds hadn’t gone to Melbourne in 2018 the WCC wouldn’t even have happened. Melbourne had no interest in coming here.