Why do teams have to represent countries????

[roopy]

The Soccer and Union World Cups have each country represented by a team, but is that the only way you are allowed to organise a World Cup?

Personally, I think it should be about getting together a decent number of teams that represent some area that people can identify with, whilst also making sure that all the best players in the world can have a good chance at showing how good they are.

I'd like to see 8 or so teams, all with a good chance to take out the title.

I'd like to see;

NSW
Qld
England
NZ
Rest of UK (the Celts) (Scotland, Wales, Ireland)
Europe (France, Russia, etc etc)
Pacific Nations (PNG, Fiji, Samoa, etc etc etc)
Rest of the world - which would include players from anywhere who weren't in the squad of their area.

I think this would give us a meaningful tournament with 8 teams who could all potentially win, or at least be a good chance at an upset win or two.

The Union WC is a joke because 2/3rds of the teams are just not up to standard, and I don't think they will get away with it again, or not in Australia anyway.

 

[dimitri]

we would be the laughing stock of the world


NO WAY JOSE

 

[In-goal]

I say no to this idea, simplty because it would take away what little respect our game still has on the international scean.

Australia
New Zealand
England
Wales
France
P.N.G.
Lebanon
Russia
+ 2 Qualifiers for mind
We also need to lock players in that represent countries at the WC, Luke Ricketson played for Ireland in the last WC now he is playing for Australia rediculous.

Players must make there choice and live with it, this i think would make players more inclined to go for smaller nations due to the fact that they may never make the Australian or Kiwi sides.

 

[dimitri]

Players must make there choice and live with it, this i think would make players more inclined to go for smaller nations due to the fact that they may never make the Australian or Kiwi sides

i agree

 

[In-goal]

Players must have pride to play for aswell when there on the field, if they are representing some cameo World 13 they may just through the towel in once the Roos get a few points on the board.

 

[Misanthrope]

I'm with dimitri and IG- organising people into novelty sides is just an accident waiting to happen. How can a Fijian or Samoa play with passion when his side is a mismatched group of Pacific Islanders?

Sides like 'Rest of the World' are always a novelty- no one can take a side composed of Yanks, Frenchmen, Russians, and Japanese players seriously.

Chris

 

[Danish Moo Cow]

Personally I'd rather build up international sides rather than divide us up just to make the competition more even.

 

[Thunderstruck]

The Union WC is a joke because 2/3rds of the teams are just not up to standard...

At the rate we're going, the RLWC is even more a dead set joke. Only Australia and New Zealand can really contest the cup and look what happened in 2000.

There's not enough decent league players in the world to make up proper country teams, we had to resort to using the grandfather rule and cases like the Irish and Lebanese teams putting Australians to play for them.

 

[Thunderstruck]

Personally, I think it should be about getting together a decent number of teams that represent some area that people can identify with, whilst also making sure that all the best players in the world can have a good chance at showing how good they are.

Some area people can identify with. I don't think in a World Cup, the Russians would identify with a mixed European team especially since they're not exactly Asians nor Europeans. They're a mix of both.

Like the Olympics, you don't play for your region, you play for your country. Would you have an Oceania All-Star team enter the Olympics? I don't think so.

If or when Europe joins up as a single country (they already have a single EU currency, an EU president, and an EU central bank), then you may consider a single team for that huge land mass.

Plus, 8 teams in a World Cup is a dead set joke. You need around 16 or more teams to make it worthwhile. These World Cups work by having countries around the world play in qualifier matches before hiting the big scene.

If what you're proposing is some kind of an All Star championship then by all means go ahead.

 

[bender]

If what you're proposing is some kind of an All Star championship then by all means go ahead.

I think this is the key right here. Too many people are hung up on the idea that a world cup needs to represent this and that with more and less and this and that. In rugby league Test Matches are the key (Lebannon and France are not official test matches and nor should "world cup matches" be. A tournament like Roopy proposed would create interest and would provide good rugby league. It would not fail completely but might not be successful when compared to the union or soccer version. So what. The whole key to the success of international game is to get interest outside of the NRL and to provide the Australian team with a legitimate challenge. Why not just call the competition the International Challenge and see if there is interest or not. I believe that if the competition is competive and marketed properly it will be a success, just like state of origin was, despite the doubters.