War of the Roses (Again)

[Dovster]

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The people in England have taken it seriously. They recognised that to grow the game internationally it shouldn't be left to skint governing bodies of other countries to run and they need an international governing body that is funded via world cups and other major tournaments. 

The problem is that the other major RL nation in the world wants to cut corners and do it cheaply and in a way they directly control. 

I was mainly referring to spreading the game domestically (UK) Although as much as Catalans/ Toulouse may be good for SL, they really haven't help France internationally.

[Dovster]

1 minute ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

I agree with you that a mid season game v France should be the best option but the fixture has not attracted the buy-in from supporters or clubs.

IMHO If a War of the Roses goes ahead it should be: 1.  Elevated and promoted as a contest that is above the standard and ferocity of SL, and 2. Acts as a test trial for a mid season international against France.

Unfortunately, the closed minded club CEO’s will not reduce the fixtures by 2 games to accomodate the above.

 

I agree 100% Club over Country everytime. Then we wonder why are where we are!

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, Dovster said:

I was mainly referring to spreading the game domestically (UK) Although as much as Catalans/ Toulouse may be good for SL, they really haven't help France internationally.

I think pretty much everything boils down to funds. In the UK we elevated London above their level, we added Gateshead, Crusaders plus adding expansion teams at the bottom of the pyramid. 

We also added Paris, Catalans, Toulouse and Toronto to the RFL structure, all of them appearing in SL at times. 

We've never been able to fund these things though, and most have struggled. I don't think that's us being penny pinchers, it's literally a case of not having the funding model to support new clubs that maybe need millions each year. 

Considering the UK clubs haven't seen any real increases in central funding in over 20 years, it's surprising how outward looking we've been tbh. 

None of that contradicts the fact we could have done much better even without money, but I don't buy that we have been as inward as people often make out. 

We've done what we can to modernise the international game, despite pretty much standing on our own. 

[RP London]

12 hours ago, KiwiRL said:

If we're going fo full Flat Capper why not, Battle of Brexit?

British Lions vs EU 

Between France, Italy, Ireland eligible players you'd scrape up a decent team.

As always marketing is the key. Need the EU guys to go full pro wrestling and heel it up to create that "us against them" mentality.

If you bring back the WOR go full GOT with it, market it as House York vs House Lancaster. 

i've said this before... get all the counties aligned as per the earl/duke that fought in the actual war of the roses and anyone from warwickshire MUST change teams at half time.. its perfect..

 

[Archie Gordon]

9 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think pretty much everything boils down to funds. In the UK we elevated London above their level, we added Gateshead, Crusaders plus adding expansion teams at the bottom of the pyramid. 

We also added Paris, Catalans, Toulouse and Toronto to the RFL structure, all of them appearing in SL at times. 

We've never been able to fund these things though, and most have struggled. I don't think that's us being penny pinchers, it's literally a case of not having the funding model to support new clubs that maybe need millions each year. 

Considering the UK clubs haven't seen any real increases in central funding in over 20 years, it's surprising how outward looking we've been tbh. 

None of that contradicts the fact we could have done much better even without money, but I don't buy that we have been as inward as people often make out. 

We've done what we can to modernise the international game, despite pretty much standing on our own. 

But never ever with a strategy or plan - which wouldn't cost much.

[Dave T]

Just now, Archie Gordon said:

But never ever with a strategy or plan - which wouldn't cost much.

Yeah that's what I hint at with things could have been better, a coordinated plan will give things a better chance of success, but money is the overwhelming missing thing imo. 

But I agree, with a strong plan, you at least give yourself every chance. 

[Dovster]

9 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think pretty much everything boils down to funds. In the UK we elevated London above their level, we added Gateshead, Crusaders plus adding expansion teams at the bottom of the pyramid. 

We also added Paris, Catalans, Toulouse and Toronto to the RFL structure, all of them appearing in SL at times. 

We've never been able to fund these things though, and most have struggled. I don't think that's us being penny pinchers, it's literally a case of not having the funding model to support new clubs that maybe need millions each year. 

Considering the UK clubs haven't seen any real increases in central funding in over 20 years, it's surprising how outward looking we've been tbh. 

None of that contradicts the fact we could have done much better even without money, but I don't buy that we have been as inward as people often make out. 

We've done what we can to modernise the international game, despite pretty much standing on our own. 

I pretty much agree with what you say. 

Although London did have their chance and had plenty of money invested (maybe badly) with little reward.

It's been said many times that we have no strategy regarding development and leave it to individuals. I do blame the inward looking CEO's and less so the RFL for this. Everyone is looking after themselves and the game doesn't grow.

For the game to have increased funding it must grow. This is what I presume IMG are employed for. (and coming backonto subject). This is an IMG proposal.

[RP London]

mid season international are never taken that seriously by the RFL so why should the fans. They plan them late and/or put them mid week in grounds not easy to get to and/or as a warm up to a champ match.. 

the roses was never pushed properly and difficult to market without a proper county opposition to Yorkshire (as pointed out Lancashire is not really represented as other counties are in there and no one has that draw to Lancashire as they do to Yorkshire). 

They may well have to make a team up to play England to make it work but they need to work out what that is and how to get some sort of "hatred" going to build up the game.. I cannot see that being the War of the Roses. Its a shame expansion hasnt worked well enough to have Heartlands v Expansion which could have been good but we are where we are.. I can only really see England v Rest of the World but they have to do that properly including the French etc too.. there is tradition in that too which could be built on.. they MUST play a game in London if they do that too as there is an audience there who would support the rest of the world.. Use it as an "expansion tool" by taking it around the country too.. maybe even into south wales as a "home match" for the rest of the world.. get eyes on.. but they would have to stick with it and build it.. 

It probably wouldnt quite work but its arguably the best option if we arent going to keep with france. 

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, Dovster said:

I pretty much agree with what you say. 

Although London did have their chance and had plenty of money invested (maybe badly) with little reward.

It's been said many times that we have no strategy regarding development and leave it to individuals. I do blame the inward looking CEO's and less so the RFL for this. Everyone is looking after themselves and the game doesn't grow.

For the game to have increased funding it must grow. This is what I presume IMG are employed for. (and coming backonto subject). This is an IMG proposal.

I think it depends what we mean really. I think people get unfair criticism. All of those expansion efforts I mentioned were voted in by clubs (although I accept there was selfishness around funding at play too). Clubs have supported the RFL's efforts around internationals, sending players to Sydney, Denver, France etc in mid-season. I do think broadly the UK clubs are supportive of an international strategy - part of the problem is that when the RFL and the FRL deliver a couple of thousand rattling round in a ground acting as pre-match entertainment for a Featherstone match then it's hard to criticise them challenging things like this new proposal! 

[RP London]

5 minutes ago, Dovster said:

I pretty much agree with what you say. 

Although London did have their chance and had plenty of money invested (maybe badly) with little reward.

It's been said many times that we have no strategy regarding development and leave it to individuals. I do blame the inward looking CEO's and less so the RFL for this. Everyone is looking after themselves and the game doesn't grow.

For the game to have increased funding it must grow. This is what I presume IMG are employed for. (and coming backonto subject). This is an IMG proposal.

to be fair when money was invested in the infrastructure and junior game in London in the 00s there was good development and things were moving forward, we still see some legacy of that with some of the good juniors but that is drying up as that money dried up around 2008-9. It shows investment does work but its a long 20-30 years of investment at that sort of level that is needed.. and major defecit financing of the senior team as well, to keep that up there and show the juniors what they can strive for. a 5-10 year investment then pull the plug will always see it fade away. 

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

England v New Zealand 1st Test 

England v France 

England v France Women

Rainbow tests 

As i said this was the old regime and Chelsea offered the stadium for free (Just security costs) through a friend  of my wife who was CEO at the time.

 

 

Todd Boehly took over in May 2022 when exactly was this? Immediately after the world cup?

Rainbow tests?

[ATLANTISMAN]

9 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Todd Boehly took over in May 2022 when exactly was this? Immediately after the world cup?

Rainbow tests?

No way back from memory around 2016 4 nations would have been the opening game but think they played in Huddersfield.

Idea for rainbow tests was 3 years ago.

[N2022]

12 hours ago, Dave T said:

What do you think it does achieve that other things don't? 

 

Well, I would imagine an opportunity to play a game or mini series which is at a higher level than any single interclub fixture in SL would be a big part of it, both to evaluate and improve those on the fringes of the Eng setup. Of course that's lost if the clubs don't buy in or key players opt out for whatever reason - like soccer clubs holding back players from friendlies with minor twinges.

[Dave T]

21 minutes ago, N2022 said:

Well, I would imagine an opportunity to play a game or mini series which is at a higher level than any single interclub fixture in SL would be a big part of it, both to evaluate and improve those on the fringes of the Eng setup. Of course that's lost if the clubs don't buy in or key players opt out for whatever reason - like soccer clubs holding back players from friendlies with minor twinges.

It's a nice principle, but you actually remove a lot of top players by 3xcluding overseas players - you arguable end up with relatively average players in certain positions. Particularly if you end up in a place where say, Yorkshire have 3 quality fullbacks and Lancs have none etc.

[RP London]

44 minutes ago, N2022 said:

Well, I would imagine an opportunity to play a game or mini series which is at a higher level than any single interclub fixture in SL would be a big part of it, both to evaluate and improve those on the fringes of the Eng setup. Of course that's lost if the clubs don't buy in or key players opt out for whatever reason - like soccer clubs holding back players from friendlies with minor twinges.

To be fair without an NRL buy in its an inter super league match at best no matter what you do... eng v france isn't even inter super league due to the depth of French players. 

[Hopie]

For any of the options available, if they are done badly they will fail to meet objectives, and given the history is the most likely outcome. That is a given, and is often unfairly targeted at the incumbent choice.

Long term goals of Rugby League in this country are likely to be ignored in the interests of a small number of club owners who wield too much power domestically, or the NRL who hold too much power generally, but what little hope is left should be pushed in the best directions available.

[17 stone giant]

Surnames A - G vs Surnames H - Z

The brilliant thing being that everyone in the country will have a team to support.

[N2022]

4 hours ago, Dave T said:

It's a nice principle, but you actually remove a lot of top players by 3xcluding overseas players - you arguable end up with relatively average players in certain positions. Particularly if you end up in a place where say, Yorkshire have 3 quality fullbacks and Lancs have none etc.

Again, I am no expert, but as a critical friend of the game I see it's often people finding reasons not to try things (or not to try them again). On the idea that W v E of Pennines might not be a perfect match with best 26 players in SL... Do NRL fans/authorities see that there might be a Kiwi or Samoan star, or even a Dom Young, who is outperforming the QLD or NSW starter in a certain position, or one side is a bit stronger than the other in the pack, and say 'no point to Origin this year, some less than stellar players in these squads'? Or do they talk the whole thing up, 'this is the best game you'll see in the world this year and you can't afford to miss it'?

[JM2010]

I know this isn’t in keeping with the arguments on this thread but does anyone want to suggest 2 x 17 based on this season’s form

[Dave T]

48 minutes ago, N2022 said:

Again, I am no expert, but as a critical friend of the game I see it's often people finding reasons not to try things (or not to try them again). On the idea that W v E of Pennines might not be a perfect match with best 26 players in SL... Do NRL fans/authorities see that there might be a Kiwi or Samoan star, or even a Dom Young, who is outperforming the QLD or NSW starter in a certain position, or one side is a bit stronger than the other in the pack, and say 'no point to Origin this year, some less than stellar players in these squads'? Or do they talk the whole thing up, 'this is the best game you'll see in the world this year and you can't afford to miss it'?

Not trying to find reasons, stating an opinion why I don't think it's appealing. And that's fine if it doesn't appeal to me - but history has shown it hasn't appealed to many others. 

I went along last time they tried this. I enjoyed a match at Headingley I recall, but there's a reason it's no longer around. It doesn't really tick any boxes - its unlikely to be commercially attractive to fans, sponsors and broadcasters, and it's unlikely to be a high intensity game that benefits England based on the fact that half a dozen of England's best won't be in it as they play NRL, then you take out all the overseas players, so you're basically left with players who are 50/60th best in the comp. 

And all the above is fine if you still want to do it, but don't be surprised when the above unfolds again. 

[Griff]

20 hours ago, KiwiRL said:

If we're going fo full Flat Capper why not, Battle of Brexit?

British Lions vs EU 

Between France, Italy, Ireland eligible players you'd scrape up a decent team.

What would your personal EU selection be ?

[N2022]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

Not trying to find reasons, stating an opinion why I don't think it's appealing. And that's fine if it doesn't appeal to me - but history has shown it hasn't appealed to many others. 

I went along last time they tried this. I enjoyed a match at Headingley I recall, but there's a reason it's no longer around. It doesn't really tick any boxes - its unlikely to be commercially attractive to fans, sponsors and broadcasters, and it's unlikely to be a high intensity game that benefits England based on the fact that half a dozen of England's best won't be in it as they play NRL, then you take out all the overseas players, so you're basically left with players who are 50/60th best in the comp. 

And all the above is fine if you still want to do it, but don't be surprised when the above unfolds again. 

OK, but Eng v Eng A is in my opinion no more likely to appeal to sponsors and fans, if anything I'd say less, and are we sure NRL clubs would release the Eng players for this venture? If not, we're not seeing the most intensity either. 

As for some of the players being as low as 50 to 60 in the SL rankings, most regular games by definition feature several players outside the top 100, so I think the players would still benefit.

Not the end of the world to me if it doesn't happen, but we are trying to drive up standards and grow the game, and this seemed to me like one of very few proposals anyone is making that could add something new at a level that would prepare Eng for genuine international success i.e. winning RLWC again which will involve a rare as hen's teeth victory over Australia.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, N2022 said:

OK, but Eng v Eng A is in my opinion no more likely to appeal to sponsors and fans, if anything I'd say less, and are we sure NRL clubs would release the Eng players for this venture? If not, we're not seeing the most intensity either. 

As for some of the players being as low as 50 to 60 in the SL rankings, most regular games by definition feature several players outside the top 100, so I think the players would still benefit.

Not the end of the world to me if it doesn't happen, but we are trying to drive up standards and grow the game, and this seemed to me like one of very few proposals anyone is making that could add something new at a level that would prepare Eng for genuine international success i.e. winning RLWC again which will involve a rare as hen's teeth victory over Australia.

I acknowledged in my post that my preference is not a commercial play but it does mean you can have an England training camp.

[KiwiRL]

7 hours ago, Griff said:

What would your personal EU selection be ?

I was somewhat taking the mickey, but, guys like..

Rushton (Ireland)
Vaughn (Italy)
Oldeski (Poland)
Alvaro (Italy)
Natoli (Italy)
Campagnolo (Italy)
Jai Field (Ireland)

On top of a core of the French international side would be pretty good actually. 

There you go. Battle of Brexit 2025.

Europe in EU Blue with Yellow V. Lions in Red with Blue V.

Have it the Etihad academy so you only need to fill 7k odd seats. 

[fenster]

5 hours ago, KiwiRL said:

I was somewhat taking the mickey, but, guys like..

Rushton (Ireland)
Vaughn (Italy)
Oldeski (Poland)
Alvaro (Italy)
Natoli (Italy)
Campagnolo (Italy)
Jai Field (Ireland)

On top of a core of the French international side would be pretty good actually. 

There you go. Battle of Brexit 2025.

Europe in EU Blue with Yellow V. Lions in Red with Blue V.

Have it the Etihad academy so you only need to fill 7k odd seats. 

People who voted leave get 50% off tickets too.