England vs Samoa Series

[Odsal Outlaw]

I think the other obvious competitive match up that should be pushed is Wales v France (appreciate today’s result was less competitive!). But two genuine RL nations that should play annually - which I think would get a decent crowd in France as it has done in the past and so shouldn’t lose money.
 

It could definitely be an annual end of season series with maybe one other nation added for a tri-series.  Winner could then play England at home in the mid season test the following year with England then playing SH opposition at end of season.

Edited October 26, 2024 by Odsal Outlaw

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

We really haven't got the same quality. We also don't have thousands of fans who will fill grounds. 

We have nothing like what happened in that 2017 World Cup with tens of thousands of Tonga fans.

No we haven't. But that argument could be made about several aspects of the game over here compared to Australia. And for me it doesn't excuse the complete lack of any effort to try and create some sort of meaningful competition over here. We're reaping what we've sown in that respect (i.e. naff all). 

[StandOffHalf]

32 minutes ago, Click said:

I think people are seriously overdoing the comparisons between Scotland when Danny Brough was around and Tonga/Samoa. 

Other than on paper having a "heritage" player, what is the simularities? 

Danny Brough didn't exactly scream Scottish pride, didn't he only go with Scotland after (what we get told on here multiple times) McNamara told him no to him playing for England?

Brough was incredibly proud of his Scottish links. He wore that kilt like a Scotsman.

[Click]

22 minutes ago, StandOffHalf said:

Brough was incredibly proud of his Scottish links. He wore that kilt like a Scotsman.

Not really the point I was trying to make though. 

More so- the 3-4k? apparent Scottish people that turned out in Workington and  Newscastle isn't remotely comparable to the situation and teams from Samoa and Tonga. 

[JM2010]

26 minutes ago, Odsal Outlaw said:

I think the other obvious competitive match up that should be pushed is Wales v France (appreciate today’s result was less competitive!). But two genuine RL nations that should play annually - which I think would get a decent crowd in France as it has done in the past and so shouldn’t lose money.
 

It could definitely be an annual end of season series with maybe one other nation added for a tri-series.  Winner could then play England at home in the mid season test the following year with England then playing SH opposition at end of season.

I like that idea. Could potentially add Ireland if they get a some of their better heritage players to commit. 
The carrot of a mid season test vs England for the winners would also add a bit more motivation for the competing nations 

[Click]

45 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

Scotland made the 2013 WC quarter finals, and drew with NZ in the 4N, so they were no mugs. I don't think anybody is under any illusions about their comparative strength in relation to the current Tonga and Samoa teams, but instead just highlighting that England are crying out for potential opponents, and we had one on our doorstep for several years and made zero effort to do anything about it.

They were a team that literally hung off what Brough could do. It isn't exactly like its a great stepping stone.

[StandOffHalf]

1 minute ago, Click said:

Not really the point I was trying to make though. 

More so- the 3-4k? apparent Scottish people that turned out in Workington and  Newscastle isn't remotely comparable to the situation and teams from Samoa and Tonga. 

Yeah, it wasn't on the scale that we see with the Pacific.

I was just responding to what seemed to be a suggestion that Brough wasn't proud to play for the Bravehearts. What I heard and saw from him wouldn't support such a take.

[Click]

Just now, StandOffHalf said:

Yeah, it wasn't on the scale that we see with the Pacific.

I was just responding to what seemed to be a suggestion that Brough wasn't proud to play for the Bravehearts. What I heard and saw from him wouldn't support such a take.

I don't know - From what we hear on these boards from some posters Brough would have been playing for England and not for Scotland if it wasn't for McNamara. 

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

30 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The strategy qe had was broadly fine, you can't really account for a partner just deciding they don't want to play anymore. In reality, you just have to hope it won't happen.

I disagree - I think the RFL have sleepwalked in to the current situation. The writing was on the wall when the Aussies started talking about taking years off from internationals. My memory may be playing tricks on me, but I'm sure the 2012 tri-nations that you cited was as a result of southern hemisphere teams not wanting to travel the year before a World Cup.

36 minutes ago, Dave T said:

In 2012 we organised a tri nations with Wales and France. It bombed

It did indeed bomb. But instead of the RFL trying to put some long-term strategies in place to try and make it more successful, they just ditched it after one go. 

39 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Where I disagree is that these nations would be any kind of replacement for Aus/Kiwi presence

I'm certainly not proposing that and don't think anyone is. But we're currently in a position where we've had to beg and plead for Samoa to come and play 2 games. And until the proposed tours are fully announced with dates, then I won't hold my breath that they're all actually going to happen.

[StandOffHalf]

2 minutes ago, Click said:

I don't know - From what we hear on these boards from some posters Brough would have been playing for England and not for Scotland if it wasn't for McNamara. 

He obviously wanted to play for England. I think he should have been England's scrum-half in 2013 alongside Widdop.

After being passed over he put a lot into the Scotland jersey over a number of years.

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

6 minutes ago, Click said:

They were a team that literally hung off what Brough could do. It isn't exactly like its a great stepping stone.

They did have a decent spine, to be fair - Brough, Peter Wallace, Lachlan Coote and Danny Addy always showed up well for Scotland. The problem is that we didn't play these teams when they were at their strongest, and no support structures were put in place to try and help them create a player pathway. So now it doesn't look like we'll ever play them other than maybe at Community Lions level. For me that's a massive opportunity missed.

[EagleEyePie]

I don't think Scotland were ever a realistic prospect for a competitive international opponent outside of a good couple of years around 2013. They performed really well during that time but it was a brief golden period that never realistically had much chance of being sustained.

That's one of the issues with all the home nations. Without a reliable production line of homegrown players it's little more than luck as to who is available that happens to qualify through their heritage. You might get lucky and have a really solid core of top Championship players and a sprinkling of Super League players and one or two from the NRL but within a couple of years you could be cannon fodder for a decent international side.

Wales and Ireland have had some decent teams in the past too but it's just so hard to build on. I may be mistaken, but I don't think the lists of eligible players for the home nations is particularly strong.

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

5 minutes ago, EagleEyePie said:

Without a reliable production line of homegrown players it's little more than luck as to who is available that happens to qualify through their heritage.

And the game over here has done nowt in the almost 20 years since GB split up to try and develop these production lines of players. So as it stands there's no prospect of these teams ever being competitive on the international stage. We've just had Wales beaten comfortably by France today in a game that wasn't even listed on the BBC website. It's all pretty depressing stuff. And trying to bring it back on topic, hopefully the players will do the business tomorrow and make it a great game, because they've been badly let down by the organisers. Again.

Edited October 26, 2024 by RugbyLeagueGeek

[Dave T]

50 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

I disagree - I think the RFL have sleepwalked in to the current situation. The writing was on the wall when the Aussies started talking about taking years off from internationals. My memory may be playing tricks on me, but I'm sure the 2012 tri-nations that you cited was as a result of southern hemisphere teams not wanting to travel the year before a World Cup.

The NRL have been horrible partners for the last 15 years plus. They started having years off from 2007, playing only 2 tests against the Kiwis all year. It was a delight when they lost that 2008 WC final 12m later on home soil.

But the RFL's actions while the Aussies were backing away was to play the Kiwis, plus Wales and France, drive expansion of both the Tri Nations and World Cup so that the likes of France, Wales, Scotland, Samoa, PNG etc got involved in more tournament games. 

In reality, no other team in sport would have to deal with this kind of scenario. To base a strategy around the world's best nation getting bored of playing internationals or leaving their shore is odd and isn't something we should need to do. 

And not only pulling themselves back, ultimately they pulled back the Kiwis, when they had a strop because we staged a game in Denver.

So I agree with the point that we should always have done more, but that's because I think we should be playing far more than we do and have.

But talk of growing the game in Scotland over a decade to replace the Aussies and Kiwis is pie in the sky. The best we could have done would have would have been lean into heritage players with the home nations.and that would have needed NRL support.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

They did have a decent spine, to be fair - Brough, Peter Wallace, Lachlan Coote and Danny Addy always showed up well for Scotland. The problem is that we didn't play these teams when they were at their strongest, and no support structures were put in place to try and help them create a player pathway. So now it doesn't look like we'll ever play them other than maybe at Community Lions level. For me that's a massive opportunity missed.

Is it a massive opportunity missed?

Why exactly?

Scotland don't play RL. They don't have clubs really. They don't play it in schools. They don't have grassroots.

Why is Scotland a massive missed opportunity?

And I say this as somebody who lives in Scotland, supports Scotland and have watched plenty of their matches across Glasgow, Edinburgh and Gala.

 

Edited October 26, 2024 by Dave T

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

In reality, no other team in sport would have to deal with this kind of scenario. To base a strategy around the world's best nation getting bored of playing internationals or leaving their shore is odd and isn't something we should need to do. 

And not only pulling themselves back, ultimately they pulled back the Kiwis, when they had a strop because we staged a game in Denver.

Fair points.

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

But talk of growing the game in Scotland over a decade to replace the Aussies and Kiwis is pie in the sky.

Again, I don't think anyone is advocating replacing the games vs the Aussies and Kiwis. But if the Aussies and Kiwis aren't interested then there's nothing to replace - instead it's a case of filling the gap. At the moment that gap is filled (partially, given that it's only 2 games) by Samoa. How long is that going to be the case for? I have very little faith that the long-term international calendar will be fully realised. Unfortunately I think the ship has sailed whereby we could have done something with the home nations to fill the gap. The game just doesn't have the money to take even what it considers to be small risks these days.

[gingerjon]

6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Is it a massive opportunity missed?

How about a compromise?

It wasn't a massive opportunity but the opportunity to create a grassroots structure sustaining a mixed heritage/Scots pathway on a par with where Wales are now - and thus creating decent opposition for emerging European nations even if no further than that - was there and wasn't developed.

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

Scotland don't play RL. They don't have clubs really. They don't play it in schools. They don't have grassroots.

The game over here had money that it chose to fritter away on pins-in-map League 1 clubs in order to pay lip service to expansion. That money could have been far better spent developing grass roots in the home nations IMO.

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Why is Scotland a massive missed opportunity?

It's a missed opportunity for England to have had some regular opposition. This would have been heavily reliant on heritage players, but I have no issue with that, providing there was some grass roots development work going on to develop pathways for homegrown players.

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

Just now, gingerjon said:

How about a compromise?

It wasn't a massive opportunity but the opportunity to create a grassroots structure sustaining a mixed heritage/Scots pathway on a par with where Wales are now - and thus creating decent opposition for emerging European nations even if no further than that - was there and wasn't developed.

I would argue that considering where we are now, and how weak the game is in all of the other home nations, that it was a massive opportunity!

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

How about a compromise?

It wasn't a massive opportunity but the opportunity to create a grassroots structure sustaining a mixed heritage/Scots pathway on a par with where Wales are now - and thus creating decent opposition for emerging European nations even if no further than that - was there and wasn't developed.

Yes. I'm happy to concede that there is a missed opportunity. I just don't think we need to overstate it. However, Wales does have a pretty long and illustrious history in RL, I do think they are different. 

But agreed, that it's disappoi ting that we have nothing. But I do see this as a massive failing around the RLIF and providing funding for development of the world game.

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

The game over here had money that it chose to fritter away on pins-in-map League 1 clubs in order to pay lip service to expansion. That money could have been far better spent developing grass roots in the home nations IMO.

What kind of money?

Anyway, I suggest we agree to.disagree, we have drifted somewhat on this thread

All good discussion though RLG.

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

Just now, Dave T said:

What kind of money?

Just briefly, it was around £75k per club per year when the new teams were introduced. Given that each of Gloucs, Oxford, Hemel and Coventry are no longer in L1 (the current Midlands Hurricanes incarnation may have taken over from Coventry, but have zero links in reality), this was a significant sum of money that was wasted with no tangible legacy in those areas.

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Anyway, I suggest we agree to.disagree,

We often do

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

All good discussion though RLG.

[Damien]

2 hours ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

They did have a decent spine, to be fair - Brough, Peter Wallace, Lachlan Coote and Danny Addy always showed up well for Scotland. The problem is that we didn't play these teams when they were at their strongest, and no support structures were put in place to try and help them create a player pathway. So now it doesn't look like we'll ever play them other than maybe at Community Lions level. For me that's a massive opportunity missed.

Wallace played 4 games in one World Cup. Coote played 3 games in one 4 Nations. And that's it, never to be seen again. They always had excuses when it came to other games and World Cup qualifiers.

Scotland were an average team, full of average SL and Championship players, that did well courtesy of Broughs boot and him directing the team about. Quite similar to what Briers had done in the past with Wales. 

Sure we could have played them for a token mid season game but it would never have had any legs.

Edited October 26, 2024 by Damien

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

2 minutes ago, Damien said:

Wallace played 4 games in one World Cup. Coote played 3 games in one 4 Nations. And that's it, never to be seen again. They always had excuses when it came to other games and World Cup qualifiers.

The thing I take from that is that 'star' players aren't interested in playing in low profile games. So we need to create events and tournaments that feel important and that these players want to play in. Unfortunately, I think that ship has sailed for us for the foreseeable future.

[Damien]

Just now, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

The thing I take from that is that 'star' players aren't interested in playing in low profile games. So we need to create events and tournaments that feel important and that these players want to play in. Unfortunately, I think that ship has sailed for us for the foreseeable future.

I think they would similarly find games with Wales, France and even England as low profile. Indeed they didn't care less about playing in the European Cup all of those years.

Throughout the 2010s Scotland lost more than they won against Wales, France and Ireland at these European Cup tournaments. They even got a 62-24 battering against England Knights.