AuckMel
Bench
- Messages
- 2,959
A Maori and Aboriginal side? Nice. I think the Indigenous All-Stars concept that kicked off in 2010 was brilliant, that may well be the start of bigger and better things for that side. Who knows.
Tonga and Samoa.
A Maori and Aboriginal side? Nice. I think the Indigenous All-Stars concept that kicked off in 2010 was brilliant, that may well be the start of bigger and better things for that side. Who knows.
Tonga and Samoa.
I find International RL more interesting than most NRL matches.
The trouble with international footy is Australia. The NRL has too much say in something it should have nothing to do with.
Back in the 50's and 60's the French showed some promise. But since then it has been all down. They will never be a force in world rugby league.
They don't have a say in who they play. It's the rugby league administrators who are putting these tournaments together who need to have a good look at themselves.
State of Origin has become the biggest meal ticket for rugby league in Australia, both commercially and as the pinnacle of on-field achievement.
The sooner the rugby league administrators embrace this, the better off the game will be.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1225945576289
Some people just don't understand, do they?
Italy has been put forth as a perfect example - the reason for a 4th nation doesn't revolve around them having a chance of winning the tournament. It is to expose the next level down to more regular matches against the Top 3 which will have strong benefits over time.
France did very well last year. It was a massive improvement on the 08 WC. Another SL team will see them continue to improve.
PNG has not done as well for reasons already pointed out in this thread. If they had the same team that played in 08 they would have done better.
Wales will get their shot next year. If they can beat France, who did well last year, then they should put up a decent show.
We shouldn't be dropping back to 3 nations. We should be expanding to 5 next year and having both a Pac and a Euro team involved. If Australia drop out of any series in 2012, as has been mooted elsewhere, then the 2012 series should be England, France, Wales, NZ and a Pac qualifier (chosen from a Pac Cup next year).
Instant success is never going to happen. The point of expanding to a Four Nations concept is to see results in the 2013 WC and WCs after that.
This will happen unless we give in to small-minded, short-sighted fools who think international football is all about whether a team can beat Australia or not.
Quidgybo said:France; a first world country bigger than Britain with the economic infrastructure and Rugby League pedigree to support professional clubs at the professional level is the most likely candidate to emerge as a fourth power.
Far from your assessment, if we as a game were truly serious about making it happen - by guaranteeing the position of two to three professional clubs in the SL, by reforming the import rules of the SL to ensure that the comp was dominated by local players with only genuine super star imports in their prime, by providing the France national side a minimum of six matches per year thru permanent entry into the Four Nations and mid year competition against England, and by providing a scholarship program for promising young English and French stars to play in the NRL - If we did these things, I have little doubt that an England vs France Four Nations final would be a genuine possibility within twenty years, perhaps even a probability.
If we were serious about making it happen.
But if the attitude you've expressed above is echoed in the corridors of power in Australia and England then you're right, it never will.
Leigh.
Not entirely sure what Cannon's final point is. It could be the typical Dirty Harry "Man's got to know his limitations" message i.e. get back in your NSW/QLD box, the international game belongs to RU, soccer, cricket & not you lot.
I think though he seems to be suggesting RL shouldn't hope it gets what it wishes for (ie a successful international tier), because that will damage Origin's status and $ value.
Huh? What harm can a post Grand Final international series, possibly have on Origin? The possibility of a Kangaroos jersey is still, at least partly, what puts the fire and meaning into Origin in the first place.
Even at the current standard of the 4N, it reinforces RL's advantage in Aust over all other codes/sports - that it alone has 3 elite professional tiers via NRL club, Origin and Kangaroos.
There is no evidence that the standard of the 4N's is damaging the RL brand, so why not play the 4N?
From where I sit, I now see two competitive teams (Aust & NZ) where once there was one, and England did provide good competition at home last year. PNG getting flogged is more likely not a sign of PNG's decline, but of the Kiwis rise as a true rival to the Kangaroos.
The alternative is to play nothing after the Grand Final. Then what? See the Wallabies-NZ Test last night trigger news articles today bemoaning RL's lost international game.
I am not sure Cannon knew what his point was only the agenda he had: lay the boot in the "other" code.
Nice post RL1908, absolutely love your site. I have been a long time lurker there for years.
Not entirely sure what Cannon's final point is. It could be the typical Dirty Harry "Man's got to know his limitations" message i.e. get back in your NSW/QLD box, the international game belongs to RU, soccer, cricket & not you lot.
I think though he seems to be suggesting RL shouldn't hope it gets what it wishes for (ie a successful international tier), because that will damage Origin's status and $ value.
Huh? What harm can a post Grand Final international series, possibly have on Origin? The possibility of a Kangaroos jersey is still, at least partly, what puts the fire and meaning into Origin in the first place.
Even at the current standard of the 4N, it reinforces RL's advantage in Aust over all other codes/sports - that it alone has 3 elite professional tiers via NRL club, Origin and Kangaroos.
There is no evidence that the standard of the 4N's is damaging the RL brand, so why not play the 4N?
From where I sit, I now see two competitive teams (Aust & NZ) where once there was one, and England did provide good competition at home last year. PNG getting flogged is more likely not a sign of PNG's decline, but of the Kiwis rise as a true rival to the Kangaroos.
The alternative is to play nothing after the Grand Final. Then what? See the Wallabies-NZ Test last night trigger news articles today bemoaning RL's lost international game.
The All Blacks have not been World Champions since 1987.
A point which was raised earlier - people have to stop thinking International Rugby League is all about beating Aus/NZ. This is true for England, sure. But outside the big 3 there have been countless entertaining matches. The fact that Australia would belt both of them does not make France vs Wales meaningless or pointless.