USA "what"

[roughyedspud]

personally,out of a squad of 25...only 13 should be heritage players...

 

[gyallop]

Can you tell us how many domestic players were in the team that qualified the USA into the WC vs. how many were in the team that went to the WC? Would be interesting to hear your insight on that.

from what is on line 4 domestic players played v jamaica , Cunz Pope garvey and kneisley. Cunz had an injury garvey went so 2 didnt Pope missed out to an NRL player and Kneisley dont know much about but the Tomahawks had a good pack

 

[gyallop]

How many heritage players do you think should be in the USA team? And do you think the number should be different from the Qualifiers and the World Cup Team if they make it?

pick the best 17 players available if that is 17 domestic and no heritage that would be a wonderful thing ..tennis and athletics use different squads for leads up and finals to rest stars and give others experience ....

 

[spinnerhowland]

from what is on line 4 domestic players played v jamaica , Cunz Pope garvey and kneisley. Cunz had an injury garvey went so 2 didnt Pope missed out to an NRL player and Kneisley dont know much about but the Tomahawks had a good pack

Cunz wasn't selected, and was offered the "Ambassador" role well after the team was picked.
Pope was offered the same role, but turned it down.

So 1 domestic player was selected in a squad of 24.

Do you know how many players got to play in the friendly before the World Cup games, and then were not named to a game in any of the WC games.

 

[spinnerhowland]

pick the best 17 players available if that is 17 domestic and no heritage that would be a wonderful thing ..tennis and athletics use different squads for leads up and finals to rest stars and give others experience ....

I just want to be clear in my understanding of your thought. Are you saying that in a squad of 24 players that will be picked for the World Cup from a developing nation, you agree with naming 24 heritage players if they are the best players and available?

Meaning that you are OK with a representative team, from a developing nation, not having a single domestic player. And when I say domestic, a Citizen who has at least registered and played a full season in the domestic competition.

I am not sure what they do in Marbles, but that wont affect me, so I wont use it as a reference sport.

 

[deal.with.it]

Didn't the fullback have a season before the WC?

 

[gyallop]

Cunz wasn't selected, and was offered the "Ambassador" role well after the team was picked.
Pope was offered the same role, but turned it down.

So 1 domestic player was selected in a squad of 24.

Do you know how many players got to play in the friendly before the World Cup games, and then were not named to a game in any of the WC games.

I dont suppose most teams dont pick injured players. The friendlies would have been like your Pioneers idea but my comment was that the heritage players got the USA into the RLWC. The AMNRL did it there way and at least got the USA into RLWC and was competitive. You get to do it your way this time and we all hope you can do the same with no heritage players which would be an outstanding achievement.

 

[deal.with.it]

It isn't possible. The USA needs to link local players with overseas comps. Only then can you have a 50-50 or more arrangement

 

[spinnerhowland]

I dont suppose most teams dont pick injured players. The friendlies would have been like your Pioneers idea but my comment was that the heritage players got the USA into the RLWC. The AMNRL did it there way and at least got the USA into RLWC and was competitive. You get to do it your way this time and we all hope you can do the same with no heritage players which would be an outstanding achievement.

That didn't clear up the question: Are you saying that in a squad of 24 players that will be picked for the World Cup from a developing nation, you are OK with selecting the entire team with heritage players if they are the best players and available?

 

[spinnerhowland]

Didn't the fullback have a season before the WC?

Other than Mike Garvey, not a single player had registered and played 1 complete season of Rugby League in the USA.

And let me be clear, this is in no way directed at the players. It is merely pointing out that the selection process needs to be more balanced and include domestic players ANY time the National team is assembled for a developing nation. In my opinion!

 

[gyallop]

That didn't clear up the question: Are you saying that in a squad of 24 players that will be picked for the World Cup from a developing nation, you are OK with selecting the entire team with heritage players if they are the best players and available?

Its a World Cup not some development event, do you seriously believe TV and corporates want to pay top dollar for anything other than the best sides available? if you have the talent you say you have there wont be a problem.

 

[gyallop]

Other than Mike Garvey, not a single player had registered and played 1 complete season of Rugby League in the USA.

And let me be clear, this is in no way directed at the players. It is merely pointing out that the selection process needs to be more balanced and include domestic players ANY time the National team is assembled for a developing nation. In my opinion!

are you sure of that? Didnt the Cats have some and what about the Hawaiians? Your opinion is what counts now but I guess the AMNRL had a different agenda for the RLWC and if that was to get the USA noticed on the world stage that worked. You get to build of the back of game credibility and i hope you guys do really well.

 

[league13]

Its a World Cup not some development event, do you seriously believe TV and corporates want to pay top dollar for anything other than the best sides available? if you have the talent you say you have there wont be a problem.

Your line of reasoning is fine, if those players that represented the USA had got them to the cup.You just can't dump all those that had done the hard yards to get them there.Hopefully that will change now and the game in the USA will benefit in doing so.

 

[spinnerhowland]

are you sure of that? Didnt the Cats have some and what about the Hawaiians? Your opinion is what counts now but I guess the AMNRL had a different agenda for the RLWC and if that was to get the USA noticed on the world stage that worked. You get to build of the back of game credibility and i hope you guys do really well.

Yes I am sure of that. The Cats had a some that played the last few games in the season after their overseas commitments. So, other than Gavey, no player had registered and played a FULL season in the AMNRL.

Again, not aimed at the players, or anyone at this stage. But those are facts.

 

[spinnerhowland]

Its a World Cup not some development event, do you seriously believe TV and corporates want to pay top dollar for anything other than the best sides available? if you have the talent you say you have there wont be a problem.

Do you really think a developing nation will support a team full of unknown heritage players representing them? I is counter productive to DEVELOPMENT. It forces domestic players to leave the game, it alienates domestic teams and fans, and it gives no one on the domestic scene any motivation to keep pushing the game into new frontiers.
If you think that naming a 100% Heritage team to please TV and Corporate Sponsor deals is worth scarfing domestic players, teams and overall development, I wouldn't use that as my "sales pitch" if you ever move to a new country and try to develop RL there.

There must ALWAYS be a balance when growing any new product or game in foreign territory. Otherwise the locals just go back to what they know, and in the USA what they know is so big and powerful, it just took one of the best RL had to offer. Balance is the key.

 

[gyallop]

Your line of reasoning is fine, if those players that represented the USA had got them to the cup.You just can't dump all those that had done the hard yards to get them there.Hopefully that will change now and the game in the USA will benefit in doing so.

no the players who got the USA into the RLWC were the heritage players 13 of the 17 v Jamaica were heritage players. The debate is whether that was a valid strategy. The USARL walked away from the AMNRL so they weren't part of what ever that plan was.

 

[gyallop]

Yes I am sure of that. The Cats had a some that played the last few games in the season after their overseas commitments. So, other than Gavey, no player had registered and played a FULL season in the AMNRL.

Again, not aimed at the players, or anyone at this stage. But those are facts.

even if you are right you are splitting hairs, at least they made the effort. You cant expect blokes who make their coin from playing sport to give up a contract to play as amateurs.

 

[gyallop]

Do you really think a developing nation will support a team full of unknown heritage players representing them? I is counter productive to DEVELOPMENT. It forces domestic players to leave the game, it alienates domestic teams and fans, and it gives no one on the domestic scene any motivation to keep pushing the game into new frontiers.
If you think that naming a 100% Heritage team to please TV and Corporate Sponsor deals is worth scarfing domestic players, teams and overall development, I wouldn't use that as my "sales pitch" if you ever move to a new country and try to develop RL there.

There must ALWAYS be a balance when growing any new product or game in foreign territory. Otherwise the locals just go back to what they know, and in the USA what they know is so big and powerful, it just took one of the best RL had to offer. Balance is the key.

I don't they took Hayne , they didn't even know he breathed...he chased them and has taken a massive pay cut to have a crack. NFL is zero threat to RL in Australia.

I don't agree /disagree with you. You can "sell" anything if everyone knows what you are doing and why and buys into it. Tonga Samoa and Fiji all got behind their heritage loaded RLWC teams and got gov't support to take some domestic players to be a non playing part of the tour to gain some experience.

I think the RLIF has put the qualifiers in the middle of 2016 so as the heritage players won't be available and the domestic players will have to win through so in 17 do you take them to the RLWC or drop some for heritage players?

 

[deluded pom?]

The RLIF would have to support a nation playing in WC qualifiers if that nation selected and was then denied access to an eligible and willing player from the NRL or the ESL.

 

[gyallop]

I am confident the RLIF is powerless as they control jack shit. NRL clubs are not going to release a player mid season for any minnow nation. They force tests to be played when it doesn't affect their comp.