Brazil scathing of IRL’s calendar

[welshmagpie]

 

[welshmagpie]

 

[Griff]

Fair assessment. In fact, perceptive.

It's what we're all thinking.

[JohnM]

9 hours ago, Griff said:

Fair assessment. In fact, perceptive.

It's what we're all thinking.

Hmmmm.  Are you sure?

[Griff]

46 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Hmmmm.  Are you sure?

Well, the smart ones are.

[Eddie]

I thought that was going to be about Alan Brazil. 

[HawkMan]

17 minutes ago, Eddie said:

I thought that was going to be about Alan Brazil. 

Alan Brazil works for talksport, have they heard of RL?

[Damien]

Well done to Brazil, that's a pretty good summary of how this will affect tier 2 nations trying to develop the game.

[Tommygilf]

15 minutes ago, HawkMan said:

Alan Brazil works for talksport, have they heard of RL?

They cover 40 Super League games a season so probably yeah.

[The Hallucinating Goose]

8 minutes ago, Damien said:

Well done to Brazil, that's a pretty good summary of how this will affect tier 2 nations trying to develop the game.

Develop the game? You know this is RL don't you? 

[JohnM]

1 hour ago, Griff said:

Well, the smart ones are.

How would you know?

[Eddie]

33 minutes ago, The Hallucinating Goose said:

Develop the game? You know this is RL don't you? 

There’s plenty of people trying to grow the game, it’s just the authorities that aren’t interested. 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

I sympathise with Brazil, I do, and in a sense they're right. But at the same time in the real world we're not going to organise expensive comps based on the needs of a small number of volunteers developing the game with a very small number of players in one new-ish country. We just aren't. They're stakeholders, yes, and their contribution to the sport is valued but other factors exist in decision-making like this whether we like that or not. 

[gingerjon]

20 minutes ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

I sympathise with Brazil, I do, and in a sense they're right. But at the same time in the real world we're not going to organise expensive comps based on the needs of a small number of volunteers developing the game with a very small number of players in one new-ish country. We just aren't. They're stakeholders, yes, and their contribution to the sport is valued but other factors exist in decision-making like this whether we like that or not. 

Their contribution to the sport is not valued. That is the very obvious conclusion to be drawn from the most recent announcement and calendar.

[Toby Chopra]

6 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Their contribution to the sport is not valued. That is the very obvious conclusion to be drawn from the most recent announcement and calendar.

Why? The announcement promises* "Regional Championships and World Cup qualifying process, including a new World Series to help nations develop" - that's what Brazil really needs, not a once in four years stab at a tournament they're not really fit for.

In the end, someone's got to underwrite the bill for a 16 nation mens tournament and in the absence of governments the only organisation left to pay for it is the NRL. Sure, would be nice if they would, but ultimately everything in rugby league will come back to the NRL paying for it. It's all we have. The RFL certainly can't afford the risk, nor should it.

Given a choice between a 16 team mens comp and keeping the women's and wheelchair tournaments, plus transition to stand-alone women's WC, I'll choose the latter every time.

*(I get promises are a questionable thing in international rugby league, but that's a different issue).

[zylya]

41 minutes ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

I sympathise with Brazil, I do, and in a sense they're right. But at the same time in the real world we're not going to organise expensive comps based on the needs of a small number of volunteers developing the game with a very small number of players in one new-ish country. We just aren't. They're stakeholders, yes, and their contribution to the sport is valued but other factors exist in decision-making like this whether we like that or not. 

I think the point is more that they've already done a load of work - including funding their own way to IRL tournaments with the eventual goal of getting to a World Cup, just to have this pulled out from under them by the IRL moving the goal posts.

Which wouldn't be as much of a problem if they were investing into these countries and supporting International teams to take part in their regional tournaments. But I didn't see anything announced about a tournament to support the growth of South America or any development plans to ensure that the good work that has started in Brazil doesn't just die out.

Even if these are the correct decisions for the whole game, the timeframe is ridiculous. There's no stability in the intl game, just lurching from one extreme to the other. How can Brazil, or any other developing country for that matter, shoot for long-term growth when the IRL is incapable of staying the course on anything?

I'm sure someone will say "regional tournaments/World Series" as part of the announcement. Let's assume I'm running Brazil Rugby League, I can hardly launch a strategy for growth of the back of an alleged Regional Tournament which has just as much chance of happening as not. There are no details (which regions, how often, funding arrangements, progression opportunity for some easy starters) and it's essentially just an idea at this stage.

[Dunbar]

8 minutes ago, zylya said:

How can Brazil, or any other developing country for that matter, shoot for long-term growth when the IRL is incapable of staying the course on anything?

I think that this an interesting point.

How much of an incentive is participation in the World Cup for on the ground development of the sport in Brazil or how much is it a reward for development.

I can certainly see how Brasil are disappointed with the 2025 tournament being postponed and its replacement in 2026 being reduced to 10 teams.  But, to quote their own strategic plan, by 2024-2025 they hope to hold Men's 13s Championship with 10 clubs and 10 rounds.  Should they really be in the elite global international competition when their domestic competition is in such infancy.*

To quote the Brasil Twitter (X!) thread, "It is understandable that perhaps a World Cup is not the best place for developing nations, but where is the ENWC? Where is the RLWC9s? Where can we show the world our appetite, passion and ambition".  This is where they need to be and should be and if RL were serious about international development then there would be solid long term plans for these tournaments to help such nations.

* I recognize that the likes of Samoa, Tonga, Fiji et al may not also have strong domestic comps and benefit massively from heritage players that Brasil do not.  That is a different, but related, point.  In fact, I would like to see the clear evidence that having these teams in the World Cup has significantly helped to develop the game on the ground in these nations.

What we need is genuine and sustainable long term development of the sport at grass roots level in these countries and let the reward follow that.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

57 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Their contribution to the sport is not valued. That is the very obvious conclusion to be drawn from the most recent announcement and calendar.

How much investment (money) would need to go their way so they do feel 'valued'? I.e. included in the WC

The IRL's money is limited. Where/who do they not spend money on so that Brazil feel 'valued'? 

[zylya]

1 minute ago, Dunbar said:

I think that this an interesting point.

How much of an incentive is participation in the World Cup for on the ground development of the sport in Brazil or how much is it a reward for development.

I can certainly see how Brasil are disappointed with the 2025 tournament being postponed and its replacement in 2026 being reduced to 10 teams.  But, to quote their own strategic plan, by 2024-2025 they hope to hold Men's 13s Championship with 10 clubs and 10 rounds.  Should they really be in the elite global international competition when their domestic competition is in such infancy.*

To quote the Brasil Twitter (X!) thread, "It is understandable that perhaps a World Cup is not the best place for developing nations, but where is the ENWC? Where is the RLWC9s? Where can we show the world our appetite, passion and ambition".  This is where they need to be and should be and if RL were serious about international development then there would be solid long term plans for these tournaments to help such nations.

* I recognize that the likes of Samoa, Tonga, Fiji et al may not also have strong domestic comps and benefit massively from heritage players that Brasil do not.  That is a different, but related, point.  In fact, I would like to see the clear evidence that having these teams in the World Cup has significantly helped to develop the game on the ground in these nations.

What we need is genuine and sustainable long term development of the sport at grass roots level in these countries and let the reward follow that.

Completely agree - if they'd announced some details on this World Series - where it is, how often, how they see it developing teams long-term then there would likely be less dismay from developing nations.

They don't actually say how many teams will be in the 2030 World Cup - whether it reverts to 16 or stays at 10.

FIFA, by contrast, announced the expansion to 48 teams for 2026 in 2017, so 9 years for associations to prepare. If an ambitious, smaller nation wanted, they could have invested in a 9-year programme to develop their national team to qualify when the tournament expanded.

IRL have given teams 2 years notice, if we count the date as 2025, or if we're generous, they've given teams 3 years notice that if you're outside that "top" group then forget about any plans you made. All the hard work Greece or Jamaica did to get themselves to the World Cup last year and the progress they each made has essentially been for nothing. If they'd announced two cycles in advance that it'd be reduced, at least nations have time to prepare for it - either by increasing investment or managing their expectations accordingly.

[Damien]

34 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

Why? The announcement promises* "Regional Championships and World Cup qualifying process, including a new World Series to help nations develop" - that's what Brazil really needs, not a once in four years stab at a tournament they're not really fit for.

In the end, someone's got to underwrite the bill for a 16 nation mens tournament and in the absence of governments the only organisation left to pay for it is the NRL. Sure, would be nice if they would, but ultimately everything in rugby league will come back to the NRL paying for it. It's all we have. The RFL certainly can't afford the risk, nor should it.

Given a choice between a 16 team mens comp and keeping the women's and wheelchair tournaments, plus transition to stand-alone women's WC, I'll choose the latter every time.

*(I get promises are a questionable thing in international rugby league, but that's a different issue).

We have run profitable tournaments since 2008. I am not buying the narrative that 16 teams means an unprofitable World Cup anymore than 14 didn't. Its also not a binary choice between standalone women's World cups and 16 teams, it is more than possible to do both.

[zylya]

4 minutes ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

How much investment (money) would need to go their way so they do feel 'valued'? I.e. included in the WC

The IRL's money is limited. Where/who do they not spend money on so that Brazil feel 'valued'? 

It's not just inclusion in the World Cup though is it? What, in the IRL announcement, do you see that will support a country like Brazil, aside from a vague mention of Regional Tournaments and a World Series idea? There's nothing concrete for a developing nation to actually plan around and build growth from.

Edited August 5, 2023 by zylya

[zylya]

-double post-

Edited August 5, 2023 by zylya

[GeordieSaint]

The IRL have ballsed up - likely caved into pressure from the NRL about the WC and England’s desperation to play Australia in the Ashes - and not thought about the broader game. It’s fag packet stuff.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

38 minutes ago, zylya said:

It's not just inclusion in the World Cup though is it? What, in the IRL announcement, do you see that will support a country like Brazil, aside from a vague mention of Regional Tournaments and a World Series idea? There's nothing concrete for a developing nation to actually plan around and build growth from.

I think HKR Bronco put it best by suggesting we hav other priorities 

The nation's that currently play RL are struggling to bother / finance internationals. Let's spend our investment and energies on getting that strong first 

It's easy to give vocal support to developing nations and criticize lack of money spent there....it's much harder to suggest who loses out by having their money reduced 

I'd rather money be spent marketing better engagement and crowds for internationals in England and France than worry about a few dozen plucky amateurs and volunteers in San Paulo

Edited August 5, 2023 by Bedfordshire Bronco

[GeordieSaint]

1 minute ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

I'd rather money be spent marketing better engagement and crowds for internationals in England and France than worry about a few dozen plucky amateurs and volunteers in San Paulo

That reads like you’ve ripped it straight out of a flat cappers rugby league journal. 

IRL funds should not be spent on marketing campaigns and engagement; that’s what national governing bodies are for.