Aus v Tonga sold out - Aus v NZ struggling to sell tickets

[LeagueXIII]

Hang on guys...

So Tongans born in NZ should play for NZ?
And NZers born in Australia should play for NZ ?

Isn’t that a little inconsistent?

I don't think so. It's not an even playing field. Australia has so much depth and resources it is good for the game that they are weakened ie, the rules tighten up and enforced by strong administrators.

Australia just wants all the best players so they can keep feeding origin.

 

[LeagueXIII]

That’s international RL for you.

I’ve no problem with people born in NZ to Tongan parents representing Tonga or people born in Australia to kiwi parents representing NZ. My problem is and always will be players hoping from 1 nation to the other. Makes a mockery of international RL.

Comes from poor leadership, have strong rules like other sports do and enforce them and these things don't happen, it's that simple.

 

[LeagueXIII]

Agreed.
Someone like Sam Burgess or SBW should not be allowed to play Origin - born and raised elsewhere.
But a bloke like Nathan Cayless, born and raised in Parramatta, should have been allowed to rep both NSW and NZ.
Ditto for Ponga. Satisfies the QLD eligibility criteria, should be able to choose his national team based on entirely separate rules.

It's easy to see why Australia does this - to ensure the best players play for the Kangaroos.
HOWEVER
1) It's selfish.
The Kangaroos barely play compared to England and NZ anyway. Why hoard players and not play?
2) It's unnecessary.
The Kangaroos have the advantage of superior eligible playing numbers and preparation (Origin) even allowing for a few to slip through to other nations. Their dominance doesn't need this to be maintained.
3) It's self defeating.
The Kangaroos dominance makes the international game less interesting and valuable, thus making the Kangaroos less valuable.

It's not so they play for Australia it's so they play Origin, playing for the green and gold is only a flow on from this policy.

 

[jim_57]

It's not so they play for Australia it's so they play Origin, playing for the green and gold is only a flow on from this policy.

If they really value Origin more than internationals then changing it to make International eligibility irrelevant would only see Origin get more eligible players/stronger. Kangaroos may lose a few in cases like Ponga, Papali'i etc, but if Origin was open to anyone that moved to QLD/NSW 12 or younger you could throw these current NZ reps in to the mix:

Player - Age they moved - State
Tapau - 10 - NSW
DWZ - 5 - NSW
Rapana - 10 - QLD
Nikorima - 12 - QLD
Beale - Born - QLD
Proctor - 12 - QLD

England players eligible would be very rare.

 

[Matua]

Hang on guys...

So Tongans born in NZ should play for NZ?
And NZers born in Australia should play for NZ ?

Isn’t that a little inconsistent?

No, I think as others have highlighted SoO shouldn't lock in eligible players to Oz. After that anyone can play for whatever international team they want (and are eligible for).

 

[Matua]

That’s international RL for you.

I’ve no problem with people born in NZ to Tongan parents representing Tonga or people born in Australia to kiwi parents representing NZ. My problem is and always will be players hoping from 1 nation to the other. Makes a mockery of international RL.

If this wasn't within the rules the whole Tongan rise that neutrals seem to love so much wouldn't have happened as Taumalolo and Fusitua would have been locked into NZ. Remember that pre-Kidwell Taumalolo was a strong enough Kiwi to turn down SoO to play for the Kiwis.

 

[Springs09]

If this wasn't within the rules the whole Tongan rise that neutrals seem to love so much wouldn't have happened as Taumalolo and Fusitua would have been locked into NZ. Remember that pre-Kidwell Taumalolo was a strong enough Kiwi to turn down SoO to play for the Kiwis.

Hmm no they would have been locked into Tonga, as both played for Tonga before playing for the Kiwis.

I really don't see why there's so much anger about players playing for 2 nations. People can be more than one nationality, I find it silly that in rugby league people think they should only be one, especially as it's very possible a player can be selected for NZ or Australia once, dropped then never selected again. Under a one nation for life rule that player would be lost to the international game. Think Sione Mata'utia for example.

 

[miguel de cervantes]

We all know international league has image issues. A part of this is the fact 95% of international players ply their trade in 2 pro comps, which means tests lose a lot of exoticism because one sees many of these players playing against each other every weekend. When England or France play SH teams, it seems, to me at least, to be a lot more interesting because there are more unknowns, differences in playing styles etc.

These SH "tests" feel more like an extension of the NRL rather than a test match, and player swapping between nations doesn't help. It makes international teams look like NRL teams - where loyalty matters little. This in turn makes it very hard to ask fans and the public at large to be loyal to their national team, which is probably the main problem with international league - a low public care factor.

 

[Matua]

Hmm no they would have been locked into Tonga, as both played for Tonga before playing for the Kiwis.

I really don't see why there's so much anger about players playing for 2 nations. People can be more than one nationality, I find it silly that in rugby league people think they should only be one, especially as it's very possible a player can be selected for NZ or Australia once, dropped then never selected again. Under a one nation for life rule that player would be lost to the international game. Think Sione Mata'utia for example.

I forgot that JT played for them in 2013, however I doubt both would have played for Tonga early in their careers if they had too make a single choice back then. JT had already played three years in the Junior Kiwis at the time. Fusitua had played two years of Junior Kiwis as well and was talking about wanting to play for the Kiwis back in 2014.

I don't think there is an issue swapping - but there should be a stand down period. As much as people love the Tongans it's not a good look for players to swap allegiances a couple of weeks out from a tournament, that's Mickey Mouse stuff.

 

[Springs09]

I forgot that JT played for them in 2013, however I doubt both would have played for Tonga early in their careers if they had too make a single choice back then. JT had already played three years in the Junior Kiwis at the time. Fusitua had played two years of Junior Kiwis as well and was talking about wanting to play for the Kiwis back in 2014.

I don't think there is an issue swapping - but there should be a stand down period. As much as people love the Tongans it's not a good look for players to swap allegiances a couple of weeks out from a tournament, that's Mickey Mouse stuff.

I'll take all the 'not a good looks' in the world if it means we get crowds to tests like the Tongan games have. Couldn't care less if a few people think it's mickey mouse.

Where does this 'it's not a good look' come from anyway. Some arbitrary rules people have in their heads? Or because it supposedly doesn't happen in other sports? Who cares?

 

[insert.pause]

expecting only 15k, which would have to be the lowest attendance for NZvAUS in NZ for quite some time, if not ever.

 

[Burns]

Alarm bells must be blaring at NZRL HQ surely. Would have thought the Warriors successful season would spur a resurgence in interest.

 

[miguel de cervantes]

cold, wet and windy forecast for Auckland wouldn't exactly help

 

[Matua]

I'll take all the 'not a good looks' in the world if it means we get crowds to tests like the Tongan games have. Couldn't care less if a few people think it's mickey mouse.

Where does this 'it's not a good look' come from anyway. Some arbitrary rules people have in their heads? Or because it supposedly doesn't happen in other sports? Who cares?

You don't think it's an issue that players change allegiances a few weeks out from a tournament? Seriously? Imagine it going the other way - from the PIs to NZ or Oz. I bet it wont be considered such a good thing then.

 

[Billythekid]

We all know international league has image issues. A part of this is the fact 95% of international players ply their trade in 2 pro comps, which means tests lose a lot of exoticism because one sees many of these players playing against each other every weekend. When England or France play SH teams, it seems, to me at least, to be a lot more interesting because there are more unknowns, differences in playing styles etc.

These SH "tests" feel more like an extension of the NRL rather than a test match, and player swapping between nations doesn't help. It makes international teams look like NRL teams - where loyalty matters little. This in turn makes it very hard to ask fans and the public at large to be loyal to their national team, which is probably the main problem with international league - a low public care factor.

There’s no real rivalries because we don’t build them. We also don’t give the countries enough matches. In the World Cup last year the only things that really saved the tournament from total failure were the support of Tonga and PNG.

So how do we follow that up? Tonga get 1 game against Australia and PNG get 1 game against the PMXIII. Just feels like a missed oppurtunity.

IMO something like a tri series between Samoa, Tonga and NZ could have been awesome (I’d include Australia but they aren’t interested in playing many games).

I would have liked to see PNG play some games against Fiji also. There is a natural rivalry there as both countries always seem to be around the same level at the WC and with one being in the QLD cup and one being in the NSW cup it kinda writes itself. PNG would sell out any matches essentially.

Right now international league just feels like this hodgepodge of random one off matches or series with no follow up or history. That’s not how you build support or allegiance. You need regular tournaments that you can build on. Something like the four nations.

 

[ZEROMISSTACKLES]

You don't think it's an issue that players change allegiances a few weeks out from a tournament? Seriously? Imagine it going the other way - from the PIs to NZ or Oz. I bet it wont be considered such a good thing then.

Would a stand down period really 'soften the blow' cos all that it's trying to achieve is a respectful departure? Would the people be so forgiving and for how long must this stand down period be?

International league is suffering, we all know that. We all know that helping the smaller nations will aid in its growth. Wouldn't a long delay in players switching allegiance to the lesser nations add to the suffering of the international game? It could very well deter players from doing so and that might not be good for the international game as well.

I see what you're saying but I question its effectiveness and whether it would be just a waste of time.

 

[KeepingTheFaith]

Why NZ aren't playing Tonga pretty much sums up how inept the NZRL currently is.

That should have been the first fixture booked in the moment the WC semi was over.

You want to build up international RL, then nuture these sort of rivalries while there's still a ton of interest.

NZRL fail again.

 

[adamkungl]

Christ we're still talking about eligibility rules... Zzzzzzzzzzz

 

[Springs09]

You don't think it's an issue that players change allegiances a few weeks out from a tournament? Seriously? Imagine it going the other way - from the PIs to NZ or Oz. I bet it wont be considered such a good thing then.

That's happened before plenty of times. It used to be the norm until the Tongan players changed it. Ricky Stuart pulling Anthony Tupou out of the Tongan squad a few weeks before the 2008 RLWC comes to mind, as does Suaia Matagi pulling out of Samoa to play for NZ before the 2014 Four Nations.

And no, I don't care. Players can play for who they want if they are eligible. Better than having Taumalolo sitting out all international games for 2 years or so so we can have an arbitrary stand down period just so less people will complain about it not being a good look.

 

[Matua]

Would a stand down period really 'soften the blow' cos all that it's trying to achieve is a respectful departure? Would the people be so forgiving and for how long must this stand down period be?

International league is suffering, we all know that. We all know that helping the smaller nations will aid in its growth. Wouldn't a long delay in players switching allegiance to the lesser nations add to the suffering of the international game? It could very well deter players from doing so and that might not be good for the international game as well.

I see what you're saying but I question its effectiveness and whether it would be just a waste of time.

I'm not saying the stand down period should be long at all, just that there should be some procedure players must go through when switching allegiances that isn't just 'I feel like swapping now - bang I'm done'. It can still allow for unselected PIs (or Irish, Scottish etc heritage) players to be selected in other teams if the team they choose doesn't select them.

That's happened before plenty of times. It used to be the norm until the Tongan players changed it. Ricky Stuart pulling Anthony Tupou out of the Tongan squad a few weeks before the 2008 RLWC comes to mind, as does Suaia Matagi pulling out of Samoa to play for NZ before the 2014 Four Nations.

And no, I don't care. Players can play for who they want if they are eligible. Better than having Taumalolo sitting out all international games for 2 years or so so we can have an arbitrary stand down period just so less people will complain about it not being a good look.

When those players (and others) swapped there was much gnashing of the teeth and wailing about it.

Also, I never said have a two year stand down period.