4 Nations 2014

[LeaguePlayer]

Yes but unlike the RFL the NRL actually understands that they are a business and that they need to make as much money as possible to survive.

Le't put it this way is making a loss in Fiji worth it when we could have made a profit in Australia or NZ?

Yes it is worth it, you have to spend money to make money. The exposure in Fiji would do wonders for the game over there. It may not turn a profit for the NRL but it would boost the sport over there which in future will help generate more money.

 

[Rodney]

Yes it is worth it, you have to spend money to make money. The exposure in Fiji would do wonders for the game over there. It may not turn a profit for the NRL but it would boost the sport over there which in future will help generate more money.

But if the competition is to retain its credibility than the host nations ought to host the event.
Also fiji are likely to lose emphatically to any nation they play over there, it'd be a much better advertisement for them to host one of the islands nations and have a credible contest than to export a token thrashing over there.

 

[Springs]

So the World Cup had no credibility because France hosted 2 games?

 

[Dogs Of War]

Wasn't australia vs nz played in Canberra last year? I would like to see more of that.

 

[Rodney]

So the World Cup had no credibility because France hosted 2 games?

Whats the point of naming a country or region to host an event when the games are going to eventually be spread among many?
I do get your point, any bid should be open to negotiations (like how PNG want in for RLWC 2017)
But if Fiji want in they'd have to be made mutual 'hosts' of the tournament (like France were) which I don't see happening.

 

[Evil Homer]

France weren't hosts of the tournament, neither were Ireland. The WC was England and Wales 2013.

 

[Rodney]

France weren't hosts of the tournament, neither were Ireland. The WC was England and Wales 2013.

I thought France + Ireland were also made hosts, or maybe that was just the work of the creative mind who wrote the Wikipedia page.

Things like this wouldn't denote the whole tournament loses its credibility but its make a shambles any proposed 'bidding' process for future professional international Rugby League events.

 

[hutch]

I can see nothing but positivity if Fiji get to host what would really be their first true full strength test match in their home country during the four nations this year. It would add to the competition, not take anything away from it!

 

[Rodney]

I can see nothing but positivity if Fiji get to host what would really be their first true full strength test match in their home country during the four nations this year. It would add to the competition, not take anything away from it!

It would be ideal for them to play their playoff against Samoa in Suva, but unfortunately that isn't possible.
I really don't think the best local introduction of international rugby league should be a trashing on behalf of one of the big three. It would be best to find them a local comparable rival and organize a test series, or restart the pacific cup and allow fiji to host their games

 

[Springs]

I thought France + Ireland were also made hosts, or maybe that was just the work of the creative mind who wrote the Wikipedia page.

Things like this wouldn't denote the whole tournament loses its credibility but its make a shambles any proposed 'bidding' process for future professional international Rugby League events.

The reason France and Ireland are listed as 'hosts' on the Wiki page is because they hosted games. Similarly if Fiji hosted a game they would be listed as a host on the 2014 Four Nations Wiki page. But how trivial is this? To host a game a country should have to be listed as a host on Wikipedia? Who cares?
France and Ireland were not hosts. England and Wales (RFL) organised the whole tournament.

 

[Rodney]

The reason France and Ireland are listed as 'hosts' on the Wiki page is because they hosted games. Similarly if Fiji hosted a game they would be listed as a host on the 2014 Four Nations Wiki page. But how trivial is this? To host a game a country should have to be listed as a host on Wikipedia? Who cares?
France and Ireland were not hosts. England and Wales (RFL) organised the whole tournament.

yeh it dosen't mean much,
but its stupid to announce 'host nations' and than hand out rights to games to whoever is conveniently closeby.
And Fiji isn't even conveniently closeby, its over 4500 kilometers away.
How are you supposed to expect English (presumably seeing as Fiji's other two games will be against host nations) tourists to shell out another grand to fly over to Fiji and back for what will probably be a pushover (or home depending on how the tournament goes)?
It'll be more like a southern hemisphere tour then a tournament.
I thought the point of announcing host nations was that people would know that games would be centralized within these areas and be able to plan to get to them. Its already annoying for most RL travelling fans due to the size of Aus and the seperation from New Zealand and adding Fiji would just make things even more so.

Credibility was the wrong word to use, but you get what I mean.

 

[Springs]

So what? Who is expecting English tourists to do that?
It's as silly as criticising the RFL because 'who would expect NZ tourists to fly to France as well'?

The point of having a game in Fiji is so Fijians can attend, not Aussies, Kiwis or Poms.

 

[Rodney]

So what? Who is expecting English tourists to do that?
It's as silly as criticising the RFL because 'who would expect NZ tourists to fly to France as well'?

The point of having a game in Fiji is so Fijians can attend, not Aussies, Kiwis or Poms.

Well that disincentives foreign fans from making the trek.
The World Cup had 6 games involving NZ and 5 of them were in England.
Even if somhow they got knocked out after the group stage they had 2 games in England and 1 in France, with the French game a singular anomaly.

Proposing a game in Fiji (assuming england are involved) leaves the travelling English team playing 3 games in 3 countries. If they make the final it'll be 4 games in 3 countries.

It also disincentivises bid for future Rugby League events.
Why fork out big bucks ( i know there aren't at the moment but in the future there may be) to buy the rights to host an event taking a decent risk when a nation could just mooch of another local bid.

And England are probably (but there's not really much doubt) going to pump the locals, not really a great advertisement for the game.
Give them a match against comparable local opposition (eg. PNG, Samoa, Tonga) to really get behind and not a token thrashing.

 

[RedVee]

Can't speak for Fijians but perhaps they would like to see the big names of England, Australia or New Zealand, regardless of the likely results.

 

[deal.with.it]

This argument is stupid.

If it is possible for Fiji to host one game, then they should.

 

[Rodney]

The reason for giving Fiji a game would be as an advertisement for the game.
We all saw the Semi-Final between Australia and Fiji.
If there is going to be a game given to Fiji it should be a worthwhile encounter and a genuine advertisement for rugby league.
And while Fiji managed to keep the margin between them and England to 24, it was a group stage match with few overall consequences (both sides were through to the next stage) and the difference between group stage matches and do-or-die matches can be seen in Fiji's performance against Australia in the groups and then later in the semis

The process of giving a game to Fiji is in itself going to be a loss. Whoever was originally intended to host the event misses out on hosting revenues as well as misses out on its appeal to foreign tourists (and implicitly overall attendances will suffer to some degree) and the logistics of shipping both teams out (and all their affiliates) to Fiji and back (at least England will probably have to come back) will cost a considerable amount of money.

For that sort of cost investment you would want to ensure that the return on investment would be somewhat guaranteed. However there's no real way of knowing how the locals will react to their local side being thrashed (which is the most likely outcome). And as an advertisement for rugby league the match will most probably be poor with the tension lost once England rack up a healthy lead.

The best way to integrate a Fijian home game into the 4-nations cycle is the Qualifier due to its distance from the actual tournament as well as the relatively well balanced teams.
The game is likely to be a close enthralling contest and much better value investment if the effort is going to be made to give Fiji a game.
I actually tried to look up if the game has been allocated a venue and to my knowledge it hasn't (although Centrebet is being tipped as the venue). This game I would like to see shipped off to Fiji.

 

[deal.with.it]

Agree that the qualify should be in suva, just as fiji proposed

 

[CC_Roosters]

Where is this years schedule! Can't beleive its still not out, they must be bickering in negotiations for it to take this long