Aboriginal and Maori WC Saga Continues

[ali]

Yet another article in the Sun Herald. I am starting to soften my view a tad. If we were to let these teams in, then it can't be at the expense of the original ten. But if it could help make the tournament a bigger success and generate a bigger profit, then maybe I'd consider it. Realistically all that really matters is that the tournament is a success in the eyes of our media. Positive stories will create crowd and corporate interest. Ok, we may get a bit of bad media in the UK if we have an Aussie Aboriginal and a NZ Maori team in the cup, but if the ARL think they can turn this into positive media down under, then maybe it's worth a go.

Furthermore, and one for the conspiracy theorists, is this why we currently are going with a awkward 10 team format? Has the ARL been planning this all along?:shock:


From www.smh.com.au
Indigenous groups join to recover 'debt of history

August 6, 2006





The Australian Aborigines and New Zealand Maori are poised to form an alliance to try to convince the International Rugby League Federation to include them in the 2008 World Cup.
After the exclusive Sun-Herald story last week about the Maori and Aborigines being snubbed, league great and proud Aborigine Arthur Beetson will meet the heads of NZ Maori Rugby League, Kevin and Howie Tamati, in Sydney this week.
Both parties have received support from the rugby league fraternity, and departing Penrith coach John Lang has pledged to do whatever he can to help the teams gain cup entry.
The Tamatis and Beetson hope to formulate a decisive "battle plan".
The Tamatis are scheduled to meet IRLF and Australian Rugby League chairman Colin Love on August 18 to discuss a range of subjects, including the participation of both indigenous teams in the cup.
Love told The Sun-Herald last week the IRLF was reluctant to give Aboriginal and Maori teams permission to play because it believes Australia and New Zealand will be represented by their national teams.
If they were allowed to play, the teams would be chosen after national teams were selected.
The Maori said they had every reason to think they would be included because they had competed in the 2000 cup. And they believe it would be symbolic in the code's centenary year for the Aborigines to play. The Tamatis will call on the ARL to repay what they say is "a debt of history".
In the NZ Maori cup proposal that was rejected by the international board early this year, it was suggested a 12-match tour of NSW and Queensland by a Maori representative team in 1908 helped the game take root in Australia.
Despite being betrayed by the promoter, the Maori returned in 1909 and played before huge crowds, which cemented popularity.
"Both the Maori and Aborigines should be there," Beetson said. "The World Cup is being treated as a celebration of rugby league's centenary year and there'll be no better opportunity to acknowledge the contribution to the code by the Aborigines and Maori than this."
Beetson, who is acknowledged as one of the game's greatest players, has asked friends he describes as "people of influence" to support him.
"I've spoken to a few people including [former QRL official] Dick 'Tosser' Turner, and I want to talk to Gorden Tallis," he said. "Gorden is an NRL director and I need him to support this. I also need him to help a few of the heavy hitters in the NRL to make the ARL realise the benefits of letting the Aborigines and Maori play."
Lang has pleaded for the ARL to throw "political correctness" out the window and embrace the concept.
"Rugby league world cups haven't really caught the public's attention in the past," he said. "But having the Aboriginal and Maori teams would help turn it into a festival of football and grab plenty of attention."
Former Panthers enforcer Mark Geyer said he'd love to watch Aboriginal and Maori teams play.
"I don't think I'll be giving up a Saturday night to watch a few of the other teams that will be competing from the developing league nations," he said.
Love has said there would be problems in changing the tournament format because teams were already involved in qualifying matches.
But Beetson said it was simply a matter of increasing the number of teams from 10 to 12.
"What's really the problem?" he asked. "It comes back to whether or not the ARL want to do it."

 

[roopy]

They would still have to play other teams to qualify - or should have to.

Maybe they could make three places in the repercharge stage instead of one and play these two teams against the other teams that have earnt a spot.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

The funniest thing about this article is the fact that the SH are talking it up as an exclusive after it revealed that the Aboriginal and Maori teams weren't going to be in the WC. We knew they weren't included months ago, maybe even more than a year ago. Hardly a revelation.

I hope they are involved. Whether they should be in the WC is hard to say. Clearly they should not take the place of two others. If they added them to the 10 and made it a 12-team tournament I'm not sure I'd be against it. They would be very strong teams and add a lot of interest to the comp. On the other hand they are not countries. They are stateless nations at best and that puts the credibility of the WC under threat. They would also hammer some of the other nations and that won't be good for them. We could end up with an Australia v Aboriginal WC final and that probably wouldn't be good. There's pros and cons. I think if they were to be involved in the competition itself they should be put into the repecharges like Roopy suggested. If not they should play during the world cup but not as part of the tournament.

 

[ali]

That is a major worry. What if the Aboriginals beat England? I'd say at full strength excluding Kangaroos reps, they would be the 4th best team in the world. The question is, how does a team with such brilliant backs and light weight forwards perform? I'd say better than all nations except the big 3. You would also think that given the explosion in Polynesian players in the NRL between the last World Cup and now, the NZ Maori would be a far more formidable team than in the 2000 world cup.

From a marketing perspective the problem I see is the NZ Maori is a genuine second string side. The majority of the best Maoris will be in the Kiwi side. However, a full strength Aboriginal side is a novelty that I bet many Aussie RL fans would be willing to pay to see. That doesn't mean they should be guarenteed a spot in the Cup. But if they are on debut (at least in modern times), then the novelty factor may make them quite the hit.

 

[griff]

It should be patently obvious to anyone that this would be incredibly damaging to the credibility of international rugby league that it is just starting to get back after the 2000 debacle. There is no way in the world it would bring out more positive media for the WC, quite the opposite in fact.

 

[bartman]

They must play against other sides to qualify, they can't be given automatic entry, especially at this stage.

If it's going to happen, it can only now be through the repecharge round, letting the best three teams there through.

I don't think an aboriginal team would beat many of the teams expected to do well? You try picking a current aboriginal side and coming up with six quality forwards - ones that wouldn't be picked in their national teams first. Their pack would not stand up internationally.

Similarly the Maroi team without first choice New Zealand squad players, assuming squads of 25, will be significantly weaker than it's outright potential. Neither side would be a danger to break top 4 in my opinion. If it can be organised so that no other competing countries are too upset about it, then it would be a nice touch for the centenary celebrations.

 

[Bezant]

No aboriginal and no maori sides in world cup. It's that simple.

However, there should be special matches involving an aboriginal rep side (v Kangaroos) and a maori side (v Kiwis) at some stage during 2008 but NOT in the world cup.

YES, the contribution of aboriginal and maori players should be recognised in 2008 but NO they should not have seperate sides in the world cup itself.

 

[Matterhorn]

Agreed. Why not get them to play in the curtain raiser to the first match of the tournament? Australia v England - assuming that is the first game.

Then you could think of using Telstra stadium.

I mean if we did include them what would happen when the national anthems are played for the country they are playing???

 

[Kurt Angle]

Aboriginal anthem - "Treaty" by Yothu Yindi.

Maori anthem - "Slice of Heaven" by Dave Dobbin.

 

[Misanthrope]

Whilst I understand that the Aboriginal and Maori 'nations' need to be paid tribute for their contributions to the game, why do they need exclusive representation? I mean, there's no 'caucasian' team asking to be in the World Cup as recognition of white Australia's contributions to the game. I'm not saying I don't want AATSI or Aoteroea in the World Cup because I'm racist - I'm saying it because this is a World Cup to be contested by nations in the traditional sense. By all means, let the two nations participate in some kind of curtain raiser - but including them in the World Cup ahead of nations such as the USA, Russia, or Lebanon is farcical. It's spitting in the face of the legitimate nations who have put in the hard yards, and it's cheapening the image of the international game. Rugby Union, Football, Cricket.... none of them include minority teams.

Aboriginal Australia and Maori New Zealand will both be represented in the World Cup. They'll both have players selected in their respective national sides. Why do they need more 'celebration' than anyone else?

 

[julian87]

Well they have their own flag and we give them handouts like we give USA attention.

 

[ozbash]

They must play against other sides to qualify, they can't be given automatic entry, especially at this stage. Bartman

damned right they should have to qualify and both sides would do it easily which, in turn, would offer more credibility to the w/cup concept.

cant speak for the Aboriginals but the Aotearoa Maori represent a soveriegn nation.
I would assume the Aboriginal nation is similar despite its 4th rate treatment .

these 2 teams have more right to be there than the aussie based italian or lebanese teams. those 2 teams represent no birthright, just an address.

 

[Misanthrope]

There is no Italian team attempting to qualify for the World Cup. As for Lebanon, under qualification guidelines they have to have their own domestic competition and include six (minimum) players from said competition. Lebanon are a nation. If we're going to allow sovereign nations to play in the World Cup, why not let states as well? We'll divide Australia into White NSW, White QLD, White Rest of the Country, and then have an Aboriginal team as well. It's stupid. There is no country of 'Aboriginalia', so there should be no team representing them in the World Cup. I'm all for them playing competitive internationals, but not contesting a cup designed to be contested by legitimate nations.

 

[ozbash]

I'm all for them playing competitive internationals, but not contesting a cup designed to be contested by legitimate nations.

surely if they play 'competitve internationals' (sanctioned by RLIF) then they should be eligible for the w/cup ?

dont the 'competitive internationals' offer more credibility and enhancement to the international game than some of the absolute strugglers who officially participate ?

 

[Noa]

Even though I'm indigenous I dont think letting a Maori ar Abroiginal team into the comp would be a positive, just for its credibility. However it would be great see a exhibtion match (regular event maybe) between the two prior to the comp.

One thing that pisses me off living in mmelbourne is seeing the AFL crow about our participation in AFL when its only a recent trend compred to Aboriginies in Rugby League. As near as the 70's AFL clubs didnt want anything to do with the black footballer.

 

[Misanthrope]

surely if they play 'competitve internationals' (sanctioned by RLIF) then they should be eligible for the w/cup ?

dont the 'competitive internationals' offer more credibility and enhancement to the international game than some of the absolute strugglers who officially participate ?

Why don't you use the quote feature?

There's a difference between competitive internationals and the World Cup - you're just chosing to ignore it. A World Cup signifies nations from around the world competing for the honour of being dubbed 'the best'. Aboriginal Australia and Maori New Zealand are not nations. They're cultures and races, sure, but they're not nations.

Now, if Aboriginals want to go out and claim some island and become an official country - power to them. Until then, they don't deserve a place in the World Cup.

 

[phonetic]

If the RLIF backpedal on this one and allow them in, they've lost me.

Absolutely, we can have them celebrated and recognised, but for the sake of the competition's credibility they should not be allowed into the competition proper. A 3 game series between Maori and aboriginals would be great. Curtain raiser to the opener, one of the quarter finals, and the final. A type of subplot to the actual competition.

Could you imagine a NZ vs NZ Maori semi final? Or likewise with the two Australian sides? It's just not right in my opinion.

I'm praying that this press doesn't snowball. No one seems to give a rats arse about international league, until they have a little barrow to push like this. Then suddenly we're reading about it in the Sun Herald. It pisses me right off.

 

[geordiesaint]

This is ridiclous and would ruin the reputation that international rugby league has started to build up again since the 2000 debacle. They are not countries and only SOVEREIGN countries should be allowed to play.

 

[ParraEelsNRL]

Why can't the Maori and Aboriginal teams play a best of 3 series during the WC?

Sydney Brisbane and Wellington.

 

[Big Bunny]

This is ridiclous and would ruin the reputation that international rugby league has started to build up again since the 2000 debacle. They are not countries and only SOVEREIGN countries should be allowed to play.

If we were to only include sovereign states then Wales, Scotland, England, Northern Ireland and Cook Islands all miss out. Other nations such as Puerto Rico, New Caledonia, Niue, Tokelau, Bermuda, the West Indies, Taiwan and American Samoa would all also be ineligible.

You don't appear to have the slightest idea of what is or isn't a country, let alone of the many existing classes for such states.