Bring back the 4 nations

[RP London]

Seriously.. just look at the last 2 days... 

[Jughead]

No, let’s not. 

Let’s create the Five Nations. Australia, England, New Zealand, Samoa, Tonga. 

[crashmon]

There will be a 4 nations type compatiton next year in SH

Just unlikely to have england in it

[Man of Kent]

How about five conferences of five nations? The Twenty Five Nations!

eg

Group A

Australia

PNG

Greece

Tuvalu

Faeroe Isles

Group B

England

Wales 

Cook Islands

Falkland Islands 

Barry Island 

Everyone plays three times, home, away and a Magic Fortnight in Benidorm.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

4 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

How about five conferences of five nations? The Twenty Five Nations!

eg

Group A

Australia

PNG

Greece

Tuvalu

Faeroe Isles

Group B

England

Wales 

Cook Islands

Falkland Islands 

Barry Island 

Everyone plays three times, home, away and a Magic Fortnight in Benidorm.

You missed out Treasure Island and Transylvania !

[The Legend]

We don't need the Southern hemisphere teams. Let's build up the home nations + France. They wouldn't want in anyway. 

Granted, England will dominate at first but the other home nations will only improve with a platform for them to improve. 

[johnh1]

Why would the home nations improve? That’s like saying let West Wales Raiders play St Helen’s every week, and they will improve.

[Tommygilf]

49 minutes ago, crashmon said:

There will be a 4 nations type compatiton next year in SH

Just unlikely to have england in it

It'll be a Six Nations, called the Oceania cup but yes you are on the right lines

[Tex Evans Thigh]

We’re done. They should do it down under though 

[moorside roughyed]

Rugby league is southern hemisphere centric. That's the problem. In the other code Ireland, Wales, Scotland and France are alot stronger,that's why the six nations is a decent competition. In rugby league there's only England who can challenge the southern hemisphere nations. That's my take anyway.

[The Legend]

26 minutes ago, johnh1 said:

Why would the home nations improve? That’s like saying let West Wales Raiders play St Helen’s every week, and they will improve.

Because kids in Scotland, Wales and Ireland would see a future in representing their country in an annual international tournament and in years down the line there would be generations of players coming through with a goal to aim for. 

Surely that would be an improvement on what we have now? Which is nothing. 

[Bolton Leyther]

1 hour ago, Man of Kent said:

How about five conferences of five nations? The Twenty Five Nations!

eg

Group A

Australia

PNG

Greece

Tuvalu

Faeroe Isles

Group B

England

Wales 

Cook Islands

Falkland Islands 

Barry Island 

Everyone plays three times, home, away and a Magic Fortnight in Benidorm.

I see Norfolk Island have been cruelly overlooked here.

[The Legend]

Is athletics better for club athletics or International athletics? Are the nation into the club stuff or the international representative aspect of that sport? 

The same with Rugby Onion and Cricket or pretty much any sport. Only football can thrive in this country purely at a club level. If you want to reach out then you have to do it on the representative level and it needs to become a tradition. 

We can overtake Rugby onion because our game is far more entertaining, we just need to give it the exposure it deserves. 

[JohnM]

1 hour ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

You missed out Treasure Island and Transylvania !

And the Isle of Man, the Isle of Wight,  the I luv Lucy, Rockall, S.od all and F### all.

[GeordieSaint]

2 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

How about five conferences of five nations? The Twenty Five Nations!

eg

Group A

Australia

PNG

Greece

Tuvalu

Faeroe Isles

Group B

England

Wales 

Cook Islands

Falkland Islands 

Barry Island 

Everyone plays three times, home, away and a Magic Fortnight in Benidorm.

Is that you Martyn Sadler?

[Madrileño]

2 hours ago, The Legend said:

 

We can overtake Rugby onion because our game is far more entertaining, we just need to give it the exposure it deserves. 

I'm sorry,  but this is the sort of deluded nonsense that keeps Rugby league from achieving any actual growth.

Rugby union, whatever you think of it, has physical grass roots clubs, with pitches, licensed clubhouses, changing rooms, floodlights etc, in almost every town from Cornwall to Cumbria. It has clubs in Leigh, in Warrington, in Hull, in Wakefield. It has clubs in towns where rugby league recently existed but has now died, like Carlisle, Cockermouth (apologies if they have been resurrected), Bramley, and Oxford. These clubs have thousands of children playing the game, thousands of parents supporting, watching and volunteering, and thousands of interested people buying drinks, pies, etc.  In turn, these thousands of people follow the upper tiers of the sport and turn up in their thousands for rugby union events such as World Cups (32k for italia v Canada at leeds) England internationals (Twickenham packed every game by fans paying top dollar) and Heineken Cup weekends where fans travel all over UK, Ireland, France and Italy.

This is a big community, massively invested in the sport they follow. Their game is in the Olympic Games, Commonwealth games and to almost the entire world, is the only version of "rugby" they have ever heard of.

Your suggestion that "we can overtake onion because our game is more entertaining " is complete and utter fantasy. 

The fact that you and I think rugby league is more entertaining is neither here nor there. The majority of paying customers completely disagree with you. They like their form of rugby much better. Rugby union makes far more money because far more people watch it, and far FAR bigger companies want to sponsor it. 

Rugby League can grow. It can expand its base, it can focus resources on driving participation among children, it can modify its rules to make it safer in light of the impending concussion litigation, it can improve facilities for participants (to retain them in the sport) and it can make its "heartland" in northern England bigger by expanding its reach step by step into cities like Sheffield, Merseyside conurbation, North Yorkshire etc, while offering regular fixtures against heartland teams. These are some realistic objectives. "Overtaking union" is simply never going to happen. 

 

[Big Picture]

3 hours ago, The Legend said:

Because kids in Scotland, Wales and Ireland would see a future in representing their country in an annual international tournament and in years down the line there would be generations of players coming through with a goal to aim for. 

Surely that would be an improvement on what we have now? Which is nothing. 

Yes it could be that, but you have to create the foundation for that first.  And that foundation can only be a big time major pro league which can offer the sort of money, profile and stature needed to inspire young athletic boys and men from the relevant countries to take up the game.  Only then can you create something to rival RU and other major sports.

1 hour ago, Madrileño said:

I'm sorry,  but this is the sort of deluded nonsense that keeps Rugby league from achieving any actual growth.

Rugby union, whatever you think of it, has physical grass roots clubs, with pitches, licensed clubhouses, changing rooms, floodlights etc, in almost every town from Cornwall to Cumbria. It has clubs in Leigh, in Warrington, in Hull, in Wakefield. It has clubs in towns where rugby league recently existed but has now died, like Carlisle, Cockermouth (apologies if they have been resurrected), Bramley, and Oxford. These clubs have thousands of children playing the game, thousands of parents supporting, watching and volunteering, and thousands of interested people buying drinks, pies, etc.  In turn, these thousands of people follow the upper tiers of the sport and turn up in their thousands for rugby union events such as World Cups (32k for italia v Canada at leeds) England internationals (Twickenham packed every game by fans paying top dollar) and Heineken Cup weekends where fans travel all over UK, Ireland, France and Italy.

This is a big community, massively invested in the sport they follow. Their game is in the Olympic Games, Commonwealth games and to almost the entire world, is the only version of "rugby" they have ever heard of.

Your suggestion that "we can overtake onion because our game is more entertaining " is complete and utter fantasy. 

The fact that you and I think rugby league is more entertaining is neither here nor there. The majority of paying customers completely disagree with you. They like their form of rugby much better. Rugby union makes far more money because far more people watch it, and far FAR bigger companies want to sponsor it. 

Rugby League can grow. It can expand its base, it can focus resources on driving participation among children, it can modify its rules to make it safer in light of the impending concussion litigation, it can improve facilities for participants (to retain them in the sport) and it can make its "heartland" in northern England bigger by expanding its reach step by step into cities like Sheffield, Merseyside conurbation, North Yorkshire etc, while offering regular fixtures against heartland teams. These are some realistic objectives. "Overtaking union" is simply never going to happen.

You're correct that overtaking Union is never going to happen with anything based on the game's traditional setup.  It could happen with a whole new venture strategically based in major cities including some where Union will never have a chance though, the only thing needed for that is a solid plan and rich investors who'd see the value in that solid plan.  Then the sky would truly be the limit.

[Iceberg Slim]

I think we need to look at the financial figures based off profits and losses. 
 

I would love to see the figures for the Oceania cup. Can anyone know where to access the financials for that event?

also what were the figures for the four nations previously, was it a financial success or were their losses and in which hemisphere were the financial losses and gains? 
 

we need hard and fast figures to sensibly say that these tournaments are viable. 
 

I see the money the IRL gain from this World Cup will continue to go to the grass roots in Africa and Europe etc. having the four nations or five or six nations will be heavily dependant on the rfl arlc and nzrl to take the bulk of the finances on themselves. The nzrl have no money and will do whatever the other 2 say. I doubt the pacific nations have any money. It’s again dependant on the arlc and rfl as the only professional leagues willing to invest in the game but they need to see a benefit to them. I think the Oceania cup was the first sign that they do see value in the international game but the next step will be the next 2 years. If they truly do commit to 6 weeks of international footy that would show me they’re serious. 
 

in saying that a 6 nations would be awesome. 
 

from a tv perspective you get 3 games you can put on prime time slots in October just before cricket really takes over in aus and nz and the rugby unions are away in Europe. 
 

i would base it on 6 nations pacific and 6 nations europe

6 nations pacific

england aus nz Samoa Tonga Fiji 

5 week round robin plus final

lowest ranking pacific team is eliminated for tour to Europe the following year 
 

6nations europe

england Aus nz France Samoa Tonga 

 

 

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

8 minutes ago, Iceberg Slim said:

I think we need to look at the financial figures based off profits and losses. 
 

I would love to see the figures for the Oceania cup. Can anyone know where to access the financials for that event?

also what were the figures for the four nations previously, was it a financial success or were their losses and in which hemisphere were the financial losses and gains? 
 

we need hard and fast figures to sensibly say that these tournaments are viable. 
 

I see the money the IRL gain from this World Cup will continue to go to the grass roots in Africa and Europe etc. having the four nations or five or six nations will be heavily dependant on the rfl arlc and nzrl to take the bulk of the finances on themselves. The nzrl have no money and will do whatever the other 2 say. I doubt the pacific nations have any money. It’s again dependant on the arlc and rfl as the only professional leagues willing to invest in the game but they need to see a benefit to them. I think the Oceania cup was the first sign that they do see value in the international game but the next step will be the next 2 years. If they truly do commit to 6 weeks of international footy that would show me they’re serious. 
 

in saying that a 6 nations would be awesome. 
 

from a tv perspective you get 3 games you can put on prime time slots in October just before cricket really takes over in aus and nz and the rugby unions are away in Europe. 
 

i would base it on 6 nations pacific and 6 nations europe

6 nations pacific

england aus nz Samoa Tonga Fiji 

5 week round robin plus final

lowest ranking pacific team is eliminated for tour to Europe the following year 
 

6nations europe

england Aus nz France Samoa Tonga 

 

 

We'd all love it. We've said it all the time on here for years. Hopefully it will

[Iceberg Slim]

12 minutes ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

We'd all love it. We've said it all the time on here for years. Hopefully it will

If we can get the figures right and the commitment from the arlc and rfl then it will be a success. To get 6 weeks a year in October November each year committed to then it will be a success and would show growth from the 4 nations concept. 
 

the finances from this years World Cup will be a good indicator for the potential 6 nations in Europe say in 2024

my only concern is we build up 6 quality nations what happens to the other 10 nations come World Cup. Not much will change if that’s the case. Rfl needs to seriously come up with a plan for wales and France. We need at least 3 solid European nations to make a decent word cup. Having a really solid top 8 for the World Cup in 2029 should be the short term goal and plan

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

36 minutes ago, Iceberg Slim said:

If we can get the figures right and the commitment from the arlc and rfl then it will be a success. To get 6 weeks a year in October November each year committed to then it will be a success and would show growth from the 4 nations concept. 
 

the finances from this years World Cup will be a good indicator for the potential 6 nations in Europe say in 2024

my only concern is we build up 6 quality nations what happens to the other 10 nations come World Cup. Not much will change if that’s the case. Rfl needs to seriously come up with a plan for wales and France. We need at least 3 solid European nations to make a decent word cup. Having a really solid top 8 for the World Cup in 2029 should be the short term goal and plan

Think the Euro cup works well for the other nations ....stick English Knights in with them 

As you say a 4,5 or 6 nations annually would be amazing if they can make it happen .....can't say I'm holding my breath though

 

[Iceberg Slim]

4 minutes ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

Think the Euro cup works well for the other nations ....stick English Knights in with them 

As you say a 4,5 or 6 nations annually would be amazing if they can make it happen .....can't say I'm holding my breath though

 

The only thing we can rely on but shouldn’t trust is the arlc committing to a 6 week window post season to international footy if they have truly committed to that I will be shocked and will applaud them for keeping their word. I hope they are legit

[gingerjon]

10 hours ago, RP London said:

Seriously.. just look at the last 2 days... 

Right now, I'd settle for there being a confirmed schedule and tickets on sale for next season before this World Cup ends - fundamentally, whatever that schedule is.

England lost yesterday but it got attention and the attitude towards the game from pretty much everyone was really positive.

If the women's RU can lose a final and still be putting out messages that they want people to be inspired to come and see them then there's absolutely no reason we can't.

So ... when and where are the games?

[UTK]

Our International game has outgrown the 4N, it is a relic that served a purpose at a time but is best left in the past.

The Oceanic Cup is the pathway forward for the Pacific and its breakout nations, it can be built into our 6N equivalent in the region. The Tongan emergence has created guaranteed crowds (at a fairly significant price point as well) for Tonga in Auckland, a 2023 Oceanic Cup needs to find the equivalent for Samoa in AUS/NZ to build a commercially attractive proposition for regular International games for Samoa.

Then we need to do it again, and again, every year in the region these teams need to be playing multiple games to solidify the brands that are being built and provide the players with reasons to maintain their commitments long-term.

England does need to be included somehow, they have to be given opportunities to play the other major nations both at home and away during each WC cycle. The priority for everyone however is a base of regular internationals against local competition with intercontinental tours supplementing this where possible, this is how we build brands, rivalries and consistently viable fixtures to underpin the international calendar.

[MatthewWoody]

At least women's ru got to the final.

We failed. 

The message is: the English game is not as good as it's on the Southern Emisphere. 

Tough to spread a message this way.