Canada v Jamaica

[Gomersall]

https://europeanrugbyleague.com/articles/2438/canada-to-host-jamaica-in-toronto-in-men...

[welshmagpie]

Good news. 

[Mathius Hellwege]

the absurdity of developing the home nations to save the international game is becoming more and more obvious: Scotland, Ireland and Wales do not habe this energy to stage matches in theier home soil (add Italy, Lebanon)

[fighting irish]

On 09/08/2024 at 13:23, Mathius Hellwege said:

the absurdity of developing the home nations to save the international game is becoming more and more obvious: Scotland, Ireland and Wales do not habe this energy to stage matches in theier home soil (add Italy, Lebanon)

I'm struggling to understand what point you are making here. Your comments are nebulous, to say the least.

I don't think anyone is trying to develop the home nations in order to ''save'' the international game.

I don't believe anyone (currently) is motivated by that kind of intention. They are merely trying to enjoy participating in the ''greatest game''.

There is no strategy afoot, to ''save the international game'', or to do anything else, in particular, for that matter.

What you see is just the random sprouting of new growth (and death) here and there without any stated long term aims. I might add, that ''it was ever thus'' and so we are where we are by dumb luck.

But are you advocating that those participants, those enthusiasts, stop bothering and pack up, just because they aren't in a position to rush to the aid of the threadbare international game? 

If we want to ''save the international game'' in the N.H. then those that have the capacity to do anything at all, (the NRL and perhaps the odd SL club) ought in my opinion, to be assisting the USARL to consolidate and grow the club game, with a view to selecting the best of them to provide the other credible N.H. teams (England, France and possibly Wales) with some credible and competitive opposition as soon as possible.

My own justification for putting effort into the development of the game in the home nations is to ensure the growth and prosperity of the Super League, but as you know, it's being left to the entrepreneurial zeal of the happy amateurs in those far-flung, nether regions.

Credible and competitive Home Nations International teams, seem sadly, to be some considerable way off. 

Edited August 12 by fighting irish

[muckymunksy]

Be a riveting game. 

[Mathius Hellwege]

On 12/08/2024 at 12:34, fighting irish said:

I'm struggling to understand what point you are making here. Your comments are nebulous, to say the least.

I don't think anyone is trying to develop the home nations in order to ''save'' the international game.

I don't believe anyone (currently) is motivated by that kind of intention. They are merely trying to enjoy participating in the ''greatest game''.

There is no strategy afoot, to ''save the international game'', or to do anything else, in particular, for that matter.

What you see is just the random sprouting of new growth (and death) here and there without any stated long term aims. I might add, that ''it was ever thus'' and so we are where we are by dumb luck.

But are you advocating that those participants, those enthusiasts, stop bothering and pack up, just because they aren't in a position to rush to the aid of the threadbare international game? 

If we want to ''save the international game'' in the N.H. then those that have the capacity to do anything at all, (the NRL and perhaps the odd SL club) ought in my opinion, to be assisting the USARL to consolidate and grow the club game, with a view to selecting the best of them to provide the other credible N.H. teams (England, France and possibly Wales) with some credible and competitive opposition as soon as possible.

My own justification for putting effort into the development of the game in the home nations is to ensure the growth and prosperity of the Super League, but as you know, it's being left to the entrepreneurial zeal of the happy amateurs in those far-flung, nether regions.

Credible and competitive Home Nations International teams, seem sadly, to be some considerable way off. 

I admire your courageoues time investment and was referring to Aaron Bowers proposals to reignite the NH international game especially through Wales, Ireland ans Scotland while they (and Italy) are not playing friendlies with domestic players like Netherlands, norway, Germany, Czech Republic, Greece, Serbia..

[Eddie]

3 minutes ago, Mathius Hellwege said:

I admire your courageoues time investment and was referring to Aaron Bowers proposals to reignite the NH international game especially through Wales, Ireland ans Scotland while they (and Italy) are not playing friendlies with domestic players like Netherlands, norway, Germany, Czech Republic, Greece, Serbia..

I haven’t read Aaron Bowers’ article but of the three only Wales has an even slim chance of having a proper international side any time soon. I can’t see a snowball’s chance of it ever happening in Scotland or Ireland unless someone rocks up with millions of pounds to throw at it / waste. 

[fighting irish]

1 minute ago, Mathius Hellwege said:

I admire your courageoues time investment and was referring to Aaron Bowers proposals to reignite the NH international game especially through Wales, Ireland ans Scotland while they (and Italy) are not playing friendlies with domestic players like Netherlands, norway, Germany, Czech Republic, Greece, Serbia..

Our engagement with these fledgling European (N.H.) nations is virtually non existent. While we bang on about Wales, Scotland and Ireland.

I'd like to see a comparison, between these European mainland bodies participation numbers and the home Nations, because we seem, in my opinion, to give too much credit to the RL home nations scant achievements/contribution to the grand scheme of things.

I think we should first of all recognise the existence of these ''other'' N.H. nations, and their achievements to date and then encourage and promote International matches between the best of them, for mutual benefit and stop dreaming about modelling the RaRa home nations competitions.

This includes of course, the other N.H. nations, Canada, USA, and Jamaica.

I say, create the competition between them and let the chips fall where they may. (I trust the European RL are getting on with it?)

If it turned out, for example, that Jamaica and Serbia rose to the top, while Scotland and Ireland fell by the way-side, burned out by the competition, so what?

N.H. Rugby League doesn't necessarily ''need'' Scotland, Ireland and Wales. 

[sam4731]

On 12/08/2024 at 12:34, fighting irish said:

I'm struggling to understand what point you are making here. Your comments are nebulous, to say the least.

I don't think anyone is trying to develop the home nations in order to ''save'' the international game.

I don't believe anyone (currently) is motivated by that kind of intention. They are merely trying to enjoy participating in the ''greatest game''.

There is no strategy afoot, to ''save the international game'', or to do anything else, in particular, for that matter.

What you see is just the random sprouting of new growth (and death) here and there without any stated long term aims. I might add, that ''it was ever thus'' and so we are where we are by dumb luck.

But are you advocating that those participants, those enthusiasts, stop bothering and pack up, just because they aren't in a position to rush to the aid of the threadbare international game? 

If we want to ''save the international game'' in the N.H. then those that have the capacity to do anything at all, (the NRL and perhaps the odd SL club) ought in my opinion, to be assisting the USARL to consolidate and grow the club game, with a view to selecting the best of them to provide the other credible N.H. teams (England, France and possibly Wales) with some credible and competitive opposition as soon as possible.

My own justification for putting effort into the development of the game in the home nations is to ensure the growth and prosperity of the Super League, but as you know, it's being left to the entrepreneurial zeal of the happy amateurs in those far-flung, nether regions.

Credible and competitive Home Nations International teams, seem sadly, to be some considerable way off. 

I have always wondered why we couldn't scoop up some reject RU players from these areas at a young age when they're still malleable. Surely it would require very little effort and resources for unknown but potentially very fruitful rewards.

[fighting irish]

1 hour ago, sam4731 said:

I have always wondered why we couldn't scoop up some reject RU players from these areas at a young age when they're still malleable. Surely it would require very little effort and resources for unknown but potentially very fruitful rewards.

Why should we pick up ''reject'' RU players? What does that mean?

Why would RU reject them at a young age, if they have potential to enjoy/succeed at Rugby League?

Why should we restrict ourselves (when recruiting) to people who have already played Rugby Union? They are a tiny minority of the total population.

I think you might be trying to be supportive of my position but your post is laced with heavily biased, pre-conceived ideas about our potential to spread the game and our relationship with/reliance upon R.U. 

[TheReaper]

I clicked on this thread to read about Canada and am very confused by basically every other nation is being talked about instead. Very confusing.

1 hour ago, sam4731 said:

I have always wondered why we couldn't scoop up some reject RU players from these areas at a young age when they're still malleable. Surely it would require very little effort and resources for unknown but potentially very fruitful rewards.

Do you think rugby clubs go around telling people not to play? Nobody gets rejected (unless you're a massive asshole). 

[Eddie]

11 minutes ago, TheReaper said:

I clicked on this thread to read about Canada and am very confused by basically every other nation is being talked about instead. Very confusing.

Do you think rugby clubs go around telling people not to play? Nobody gets rejected (unless you're a massive asshole). 

Of course clubs do that, they tell people when they’re not good enough. 

[JonM]

3 hours ago, fighting irish said:

Our engagement with these fledgling European (N.H.) nations is virtually non existent. While we bang on about Wales, Scotland and Ireland.

I'd like to see a comparison, between these European mainland bodies participation numbers and the home Nations, because we seem, in my opinion, to give too much credit to the RL home nations scant achievements/contribution to the grand scheme of things.

Czechia managed a top level competition of four teams playing each other home and away, plus play-offs, plus another half dozen teams playing friendlies and/or in a development league, plus some u-16s and u-12s, plus various other bits of junior activity and u-16 and u-19 internationals vs Norway, and a club taking part in the Balkan League. Czechia & Norway pretty clearly have more happening than Scotland does, as would places like Greece & Serbia obviously.

[fighting irish]

2 minutes ago, JonM said:

Czechia managed a top level competition of four teams playing each other home and away, plus play-offs, plus another half dozen teams playing friendlies and/or in a development league, plus some u-16s and u-12s, plus various other bits of junior activity and u-16 and u-19 internationals vs Norway, and a club taking part in the Balkan League. Czechia & Norway pretty clearly have more happening than Scotland does, as would places like Greece & Serbia obviously.

Without nit-picking, they are on a par roughly, with Wales but perhaps without the numbers of heritage players.

Well that's great (isn't it?) I salute them. Let's see how they develop.

If they advance faster than Wales and indeed become more and more competitive at International level, that can only be good, surely?

Wales' part in the European Championships would become increasingly irrelevant.

Personally that would be sad, but unimportant in the grand scheme of things. 

[TheReaper]

5 hours ago, Eddie said:

Of course clubs do that, they tell people when they’re not good enough. 

We absolutely do not do that here.

If you don't have enough players to fill out your team sheet, you're happy to have anyone willing to put on some boots.

If you have too many players for one squad, you run a 2nds team. Sometimes 2nds will play 10s or 7s if you can't swing 2 full squads. Lots of guys play 160 minutes a weekend. The young energetic ones who are hungry for lots of rugby.

If you're easily filling out 2 teams, you might run a third. I've personally played against 4th XVs of Waterloo and Oakville. I think at one point Balmy Beach had 5. 

No one gets told they can't play rugby. They at worst get told they weren't selected for the 1st team, or that they're on the bench instead of starting. But if you show up and train, you're welcome and you get to play rugby. We don't have the luxury of turning anyone away.

 

Edit: this happens in high school too. My high school had one team for all grades ("varsity" rugby). The girls team had a lot more players, so they ran Junior (grades 9 and 10) and Senior (grades 11 and 12). One of the big schools in Brantford runs a team for every grade. 

Edited August 14 by TheReaper

[Eddie]

22 minutes ago, TheReaper said:

We absolutely do not do that here.

If you don't have enough players to fill out your team sheet, you're happy to have anyone willing to put on some boots.

If you have too many players for one squad, you run a 2nds team. Sometimes 2nds will play 10s or 7s if you can't swing 2 full squads. Lots of guys play 160 minutes a weekend. The young energetic ones who are hungry for lots of rugby.

If you're easily filling out 2 teams, you might run a third. I've personally played against 4th XVs of Waterloo and Oakville. I think at one point Balmy Beach had 5. 

No one gets told they can't play rugby. They at worst get told they weren't selected for the 1st team, or that they're on the bench instead of starting. But if you show up and train, you're welcome and you get to play rugby. We don't have the luxury of turning anyone away.

 

Edit: this happens in high school too. My high school had one team for all grades ("varsity" rugby). The girls team had a lot more players, so they ran Junior (grades 9 and 10) and Senior (grades 11 and 12). One of the big schools in Brantford runs a team for every grade. 

I agree with what you’re saying about community clubs but that’s clearly not the case for all clubs. Do you think if I rocked up at Wigan I’d get a game for one of their teams? 

[TheReaper]

Did you miss a step? This all came from someone trying to pick up "reject RU players", in Canada.

[Eddie]

29 minutes ago, TheReaper said:

Did you miss a step? This all came from someone trying to pick up "reject RU players", in Canada.

I think I did yes

[sam4731]

Just now, fighting irish said:

Why should we pick up ''reject'' RU players? What does that mean?

Why would RU reject them at a young age, if they have potential to enjoy/succeed at Rugby League?

Why should we restrict ourselves (when recruiting) to people who have already played Rugby Union? They are a tiny minority of the total population.

I think you might be trying to be supportive of my position but your post is laced with heavily biased, pre-conceived ideas about our potential to spread the game and our relationship with/reliance upon R.U. 

 

Just now, TheReaper said:

I clicked on this thread to read about Canada and am very confused by basically every other nation is being talked about instead. Very confusing.

Do you think rugby clubs go around telling people not to play? Nobody gets rejected (unless you're a massive asshole). 

I just thought that there might be some talent that doesn't quite make it in union that we might be able to take advantage of. I've said the same about American Football in terms of growth in the US.