War of the Roses (Again)

[Bongo1]

13 minutes ago, Damien said:

Ah yes. That would be great. We all know what happened the last time though.

Unfortunately 

[Eddie]

1 hour ago, Barley Mow said:

There seem to be three workable options for mid-season representative games - 

England v France

England v Combined Nations

Yorkshire v Lancashire

I doubt that any of them would have a majority of people supporting them or would draw large crowds. I would be interesting to see which would have most support.

Consensus seems to be that none are particularly inspiring, but they are the options and we need to do at least one of them.

Of those three uninspiring yet realistic options I’d prefer England v France. I still wouldn’t go out of my way to watch it though. 

[Sports Prophet]

2 hours ago, gingerjon said:

This is likely to be the most pro-Roses group you could find, with the exception of the League Express mailbag.

And it's still getting trounced.

Or perhaps that is just a grand assumption you’ve made.

[MatthewWoody]

4 hours ago, gingerjon said:

It wouldn't be a grand finale to the season - I think you're misreading the idea. England play France the week after the Grand Final, the week after that, they both go off and play their real opponents having had a warm up.

This can be interesting and has a better logic than the midseason test. 

I hope France is somehow involved next year, with a test v England (say, giving a rest to those involved in the GF) or Australia (though I'd prefer something like Wigan v Kangaroos or similar. It'd get a good crowd.)

[MatthewWoody]

5 hours ago, Eddie said:

They are, they’re like a top SL side against an average championship side in the challenge cup. I do feel for France I want the game there to grow as much  as anyone, but to claim they’re ready to face England in two meaningful matches a year is well off the mark. Sadly the NH is hamstrung as far as internationals go. 

Sad but true

[17 stone giant]

Harry Stottle XIII vs IMG Allstars

[Eddie]

30 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

Or perhaps that is just a grand assumption you’ve made.

Honestly we live here and know how little interest there’d be. Even of the 42% who’ve said yes I expect many are joking and the others wouldn’t actually watch it they just like the idea of it.  

[JonM]

4 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

42% of people voting on this forum have voted to bring it back. I wouldn’t say that is good demonstration of no-one giving a toss.

I grew up in an RL town in "Lancashire" and watched several Lancashire v Yorkshire games back in the 1980s in front of crowds lower than a normal league game at the same venue would attract. Even 35+ years ago, most of my peers at school were blissfully unaware of the fact that we were from "Lancashire" and that they should care about it. This forum is over-represented with people (like me) who follow county cricket, take an interest in the history of rugby league and so on, but the idea that any amount of marketing will persuade the general public in the north west to care about this is is just comical.

I accept that maybe things are different in Yorkshire, where they don't have any big soccer clubs, or deeply felt inter-city rivalries, the 1974 county boundary changes were less impactful, many things are still named for the county, there are stereotypes about Yorkshiremen and so perhaps more residual county pride.

(Edit - and FWIW, I don't vote in the poll. It's so obviously a stupid idea.]

Edited November 5, 2024 by JonM

[JonM]

4 hours ago, Barley Mow said:

There seem to be three workable options for mid-season representative games - 

England v France

England v Combined Nations

England playing a game against any kind of reasonable opposition seems to me to be a good thing in terms of preparation for world cups, ashes. And I think either of those teams count as reasonable opposition from the playing strength point of view. It allows the team to get used to playing together, allows the coach to experiment with combinations and so on. Every other comparable international team sport - soccer, rugby union, cricket routinely play international fixtures where the likely result is known at the outset, so I don't see the fact that France never win as a reason not to do it. 

Agree that France would be weaker opposition than the Combined Nations option. It also has the problem that it potentially impacts Catalans in a way that other SL clubs aren't.  On the other hand, France playing England gives France the same benefits of team getting used to playing together etc. It also seems like a more credible game to the non-RL follower. I think it's correct that simply playing these games will not of itself make France stronger. I think strengthening France is very much more difficult. That would need something to stem the continuing decline in the number of clubs and juniors playing to provide any kind of talent pool, and perhaps something to stop the best young athletes simply going to RU for better money.

I think the average English sports fan would be quite happy to watch an England team thrash a French team. The thousands of kids who watched England thrash Brazil in the women's world cup went home pretty happy.  They didn't care that Brazil weren't very good. They'd seen England play and win. The problem with England v France at Leigh or wherever is that you're going after the wrong audience. Play it somewhere where you're trying to build support for RL - Newcastle, or Sheffield or Cumbria or wherever and actually do some work to get non-RL people to come. And if coaches and admin people can avoid sabotaging the game every year by calling it a friendly, even better. There should be a cup at stake.

Rugby Union has an equivalent to the Exiles/ Combined Nations - the Barbarians. Now obviously we can't create 100+ years of history that they have, but that's the model you want to be aiming for. People playing for that team should consider it an honour - they get presented with their jersey, inducted into the club and so on. Maybe you can use it to involve a player from Serbia or somewhere in a top level game. 

Could also consider just playing an England game as a charity MND fundraiser if the lack of a crowd is a problem. You could take that to pretty much any town with a smallish soccer ground and get the charity to do the work of selling the tickets. The RFL lose the revenue, but at least the charity would actually be motivated to do something and it probably ends up higher profile in the national media than the current barely lift a finger attempts. 

[JM2010]

I think out of the three options playing a combined nations would be my choice with France vs Wales and Scotland vs Ireland at the same time. 
England Knights could even get a game in against Jamaica maybe

If we could organise a game against NZ though then ignore all of the above!

[MatthewWoody]

4 minutes ago, JM2010 said:

I think out of the three options playing a combined nations would be my choice with France vs Wales and Scotland vs Ireland at the same time. 
England Knights could even get a game in against Jamaica maybe

If we could organise a game against NZ though then ignore all of the above!

Perfect.

The Knights should play more. Their tour in PNG I believe was a great experience. 

[paulwalker71]

What about a game versus PNG in Port Moresby if we want England to play?

Fly the squad out on Monday morning after club games, spend the week in camp, play on Saturday and fly back on Sunday so the players are back with their clubs on Monday or Tuesday.

Is that so ridiculous in an age of air travel and globalism? And at least PNG will test an England team.

None of the options I've seen on this thread for a game in England seem viable in terms of giving England a proper workout before we face the Aussies.

Edited November 5, 2024 by paulwalker71

[Archie Gordon]

12 minutes ago, paulwalker71 said:

What about a game versus PNG in Port Moresby if we want England to play?

Fly the squad out on Monday morning after club games, spend the week in camp, play on Saturday and fly back on Sunday so the players are back with their clubs on Monday or Tuesday.

Is that so ridiculous in an age of air travel and globalism? And at least PNG will test an England team.

None of the options I've seen on this thread for a game in England seem viable in terms of giving England a proper workout before we face the Aussies.

I do, of course, like the PNG idea and would simply note that the majority of that squad will already be in England so why not play here?

[StandOffHalf]

2 hours ago, JonM said:

England playing a game against any kind of reasonable opposition seems to me to be a good thing in terms of preparation for world cups, ashes. And I think either of those teams count as reasonable opposition from the playing strength point of view. It allows the team to get used to playing together, allows the coach to experiment with combinations and so on. Every other comparable international team sport - soccer, rugby union, cricket routinely play international fixtures where the likely result is known at the outset, so I don't see the fact that France never win as a reason not to do it. 

Agree that France would be weaker opposition than the Combined Nations option. It also has the problem that it potentially impacts Catalans in a way that other SL clubs aren't.  On the other hand, France playing England gives France the same benefits of team getting used to playing together etc. It also seems like a more credible game to the non-RL follower. I think it's correct that simply playing these games will not of itself make France stronger. I think strengthening France is very much more difficult. That would need something to stem the continuing decline in the number of clubs and juniors playing to provide any kind of talent pool, and perhaps something to stop the best young athletes simply going to RU for better money.

I think the average English sports fan would be quite happy to watch an England team thrash a French team. The thousands of kids who watched England thrash Brazil in the women's world cup went home pretty happy.  They didn't care that Brazil weren't very good. They'd seen England play and win. The problem with England v France at Leigh or wherever is that you're going after the wrong audience. Play it somewhere where you're trying to build support for RL - Newcastle, or Sheffield or Cumbria or wherever and actually do some work to get non-RL people to come. And if coaches and admin people can avoid sabotaging the game every year by calling it a friendly, even better. There should be a cup at stake.

Rugby Union has an equivalent to the Exiles/ Combined Nations - the Barbarians. Now obviously we can't create 100+ years of history that they have, but that's the model you want to be aiming for. People playing for that team should consider it an honour - they get presented with their jersey, inducted into the club and so on. Maybe you can use it to involve a player from Serbia or somewhere in a top level game. 

Could also consider just playing an England game as a charity MND fundraiser if the lack of a crowd is a problem. You could take that to pretty much any town with a smallish soccer ground and get the charity to do the work of selling the tickets. The RFL lose the revenue, but at least the charity would actually be motivated to do something and it probably ends up higher profile in the national media than the current barely lift a finger attempts. 

I love the fact that the Barbarians try to pick an uncapped player in every squad.

I think your point about RL not having something similar doesn't quite do justice to our sport though. Other Nationalities was a lovely concept and in many ways similar to the Exiles. They played in the first RL international in 1904 against England, only 14 years after the Baa-Baas were formed.

I think we should build upon this history. I would in fact favour England playing Other Nationalities again, along with playing France.

Edited November 5, 2024 by StandOffHalf

[JT RL]

5 hours ago, MatthewWoody said:

Sad but true

Play once a year

Rotate home and away

Pick a weekend

Pick 2 grounds / city

Sign a licence for 10 years

Back it

 

[sam4731]

I'll throw another idea into the mix, just to play devil's advocate.

Have an NFL pro bowl style game. Teams are picked by a combination of a fan vote and head coach wildcard picks. Have slightly modified rule set to make the game more interesting, amp up the pre match and half time entertainment and get the crowd involved during the game.

Not saying I'm in favour of it but I thought it might provoke some discussion either way.

[MatthewWoody]

2 hours ago, StandOffHalf said:

I love the fact that the Barbarians try to pick an uncapped player in every squad.

I think your point about RL not having something similar doesn't quite do justice to our sport though. Other Nationalities was a lovely concept and in many ways similar to the Exiles. They played in the first RL international in 1904 against England, only 14 years after the Baa-Baas were formed.

I think we should build upon this history. I would in fact favour England playing Other Nationalities again, along with playing France.

We can build on this history. 

[yipyee]

14 hours ago, Eddie said:

Can’t wait for Merseyside v London District. Will that be at Anfield or Everton’s new ground? 

Obviously at Saints 

[yipyee]

13 hours ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

Greater Manchester is not really a sporting thing at all and nobody, repeat nobody, outside Manchester self identifies as a Greater Mancunian.

Whereas anybody who has been to Lancashire CCC will hear accents from all over the ancient palatine of Lancashire both west and east.

Lancashire is the best identity for a team on this side of the hill.

 

Tell a scouser they are the same as mancs and see how far you get, then tell people from Preston and surrounding areas etc..

I get that the very old generations will identify with Lancashire but anyone under 60 wont

[Sports Prophet]

7 hours ago, Eddie said:

Honestly we live here and know how little interest there’d be. Even of the 42% who’ve said yes I expect many are joking and the others wouldn’t actually watch it they just like the idea of it.  

 

6 hours ago, JonM said:

I grew up in an RL town in "Lancashire" and watched several Lancashire v Yorkshire games back in the 1980s in front of crowds lower than a normal league game at the same venue would attract. Even 35+ years ago, most of my peers at school were blissfully unaware of the fact that we were from "Lancashire" and that they should care about it. This forum is over-represented with people (like me) who follow county cricket, take an interest in the history of rugby league and so on, but the idea that any amount of marketing will persuade the general public in the north west to care about this is is just comical.

I accept that maybe things are different in Yorkshire, where they don't have any big soccer clubs, or deeply felt inter-city rivalries, the 1974 county boundary changes were less impactful, many things are still named for the county, there are stereotypes about Yorkshiremen and so perhaps more residual county pride.

(Edit - and FWIW, I don't vote in the poll. It's so obviously a stupid idea.]

I think what both of you and many others on this forum are mistaking is that the two teams competing really matter less than the occasion and match which is played.

People around the world do not follow gridiron and EPL etc because they have any deep and meaningful connection to the geography the teams supposedly represent, they follow the sport and the occasion and the event.

I am not saying that we should expect the world to go bananas for a WotR event, but what I am saying is that a competitive, well executed RL event should get enough of a following locally before gradually gaining interest beyond. 

Does RL commercial have the capacity and skillset to make WotR a competitive and well executed event… well from the attendances of the last six home test matches featuring England, I have very little faith.

[Hopie]

Long term we need two international windows, and we need to be playing top 5 opposition in each window. I think short term roses is the best route to beating Australia which has to be the big goal, if we want to expand the game in this country that is the way to do it, a world number 1 rugby league team, because the club game is not bringing in the new audience we need. 

If we have a 2/3 week break for domestic games and put on roses matches and an international against France that could also be a starting point for that second window, that would also mirror the model that the women's team use.

[Gerrumonside ref]

1 hour ago, yipyee said:

Tell a scouser they are the same as mancs and see how far you get, then tell people from Preston and surrounding areas etc..

I get that the very old generations will identify with Lancashire but anyone under 60 wont

Yet people from Liverpool will and do watch Lancashire CCC at Old Trafford and Southport.

 

 

Edited November 5, 2024 by Gerrumonside ref

[yipyee]

1 hour ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

Yet people from Liverpool will and do watch Lancashire CCC at Old Trafford and Southport.

 

 

They do, but not in big numbers, to make this a success then the current fans need to be on board AND then appeal to the wider Lancastrians (who won't see themselves as lancastrians)

Die hard RL fans will get on board but that's about it. 

With the cricket it's always been there and therfore accepted. 

This will be in all essence of the modern era , a new venture.

[Gerrumonside ref]

9 minutes ago, yipyee said:

They do, but not in big numbers, to make this a success then the current fans need to be on board AND then appeal to the wider Lancastrians (who won't see themselves as lancastrians)

Die hard RL fans will get on board but that's about it. 

With the cricket it's always been there and therfore accepted. 

This will be in all essence of the modern era , a new venture.

I think though your plan for a Greater Manchester rugby league team is infinitely more prosperous as NOBODY, repeat NOBODY, outside the city of Manchester self identifies as a Greater Mancunian.

In fact there’s outright hostility to the concept.

Whatever the weaknesses of ‘Lancashire’ it is still going to sell more tickets than ‘Greater Manchester’ or ‘Merseyside’ ever would which was the proposal that I was replying to of yours.

Edited November 6, 2024 by Gerrumonside ref

[17 stone giant]

2 hours ago, Hopie said:

Long term we need two international windows, and we need to be playing top 5 opposition in each window. I think short term roses is the best route to beating Australia which has to be the big goal, if we want to expand the game in this country that is the way to do it, a world number 1 rugby league team, because the club game is not bringing in the new audience we need. 

If we have a 2/3 week break for domestic games and put on roses matches and an international against France that could also be a starting point for that second window, that would also mirror the model that the women's team use.

But then where would the Roses fit in once you've hopefully created that second international window? Presumably just dumped like most thing in rugby league seem to be.

Surely if it's being brought back, it should be with the view of building it up as our equivalent of Aussie Origin. There has to be a long term commitment to playing it and making it a success.

I'm not in favour of bringing back the Roses as a stop gap until we hopefully persuade Australia etc. of the need for a second international window. If that's the main aim, let's play France and Wales. They might be one sided, but we're at least demonstrating our desire for a second international window.

Edited November 6, 2024 by 17 stone giant
.