Change the RLWC Qualification Process

[kiwileaguefan]

Before i get burnt to death by key board warriors, would changing RLWC Qualifiers to only allow nations to play domestic players remove this embarrassment of nations qualifying sorely on heritage players?

Before i get ripped to bits on this suggestion, i haven't thought to much about the detail, but surely this would force certain nations to get serious about development in their country?

Obliviously there would have to be rules in place like players born in the country but playing aboard are eligible. But at this current rate i can see Russia giving the game away, and what incentives are their for Serbia, Ukraine, Jamaica, Spain etc to stay playing the game??

Then if say Italy/Lebanon qualify for the RLWC then they could bring in heritage players...

Thoughts?

 

[adamkungl]

I think there are some changes that could be made, as I mentioned in the match thread, but I don't think this is it - I prefer the grandparent rule scaling back to a parent rule.
If Russia qualified for the WC they would be destroyed, more embarrassing for the sport on a far bigger stage, if that's what we're concerned about.
Consistency of rules across tournaments is ideal.

 

[Billythekid]

I don't agree and I don't think this is an issue for international league despite some parts of the media banging on about it. What we need are competitive teams. Russia making the world cup and then being embarrassed in 60+ point floggings does nothing for the game and I don't see it doing all that much for Russia locally either. I think having different rules for qualifying and the actual tournament makes us look pretty amateur. If heritage players can play in the world cup than they should be able to play in qualifiers, simple as that.

I disagree that this would force countries to increase development in their own country. If you want countries to develop more you need to help them with funding and setting up the local scene, give them more opportunities to play regular international games and depending where the country is located work on getting them a team in a professional/ semi pro comp (like France, Wales, PNG, Fiji etc).

I don't think Italy and Lebanon qualifying as they have is bad for the game whatsoever.

For future reference starting you thread with "Before i get burnt to death by key board warriors" is a terrible way to encourage any real discussion.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

*Have half decent minimum domestic standards to be eligible for qualification - and enforce them!
*Get rid of the ridiculous grandparent rule.
*Minimum domestic players in ALL qualifiers.

If that means some counties are either weakened or can't compete, tough shit.

It might actually make some of these countries do more to grow the game if they want to play in the WC.

 

[kiwileaguefan]

I think there are some changes that could be made, as I mentioned in the match thread, but I don't think this is it - I prefer the grandparent rule scaling back to a parent rule.
If Russia qualified for the WC they would be destroyed, more embarrassing for the sport on a far bigger stage, if that's what we're concerned about.
Consistency of rules across tournaments is ideal.

Thats whats wrong with our game, to scared of massive scorelines so we basically allow heritage teams to play instead of nations like Russia, South Africa, Canada and Serbia.

So now we have effectively Samoa, Tonga, Italy, Lebanon, and Scotland basically going to be heritage nations at the next RLWC (which is no change from the past two World Cups for these nations)....and it could increase depending on whether USA and Ireland are true to their words about using less heritage players...

5 Countries which are heritage are more of embarrassment to the game then a having nations like Russia losing by 80 points.

 

[LeagueXIII]

If these heritage teams play in the world cup they should be required to carry upto 8 local players in their squad of 24 or whatever.

Unfortunately saying countries should do more is not fair as there is no money or depth. The NRL should do more to help the game as a whole.

 

[BuderusIsaBeast]

I would only allow the countries that are full members of the RLIF to participate in World Cup Qualifiers. This would mean countries like Italy woudn't be able to compete untill they make real improvements domestically. It would also allow more countries that are doing it the right way in Serbia and Russia more of a chance. ATM there are 18 full members. In the future the 8 quarter finalists will qualify automatically (provided they are full members) and the rest that are full members will qualify for the other 8 spots.

After the 2017 World Cup I would love to see the RLIF have another looks at where each country should stand. Scotland should not be a full member and I believe Canada and USA should.
For those who are unaware the full members are Australia, New Zealand, PNG, Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, Cook Islands, England, Wales, Ireland, Scotland, France, Serbia, Russia, Ukraine, Lebanon, South Africa and Jamacia

 

[johnny plath]

Thats whats wrong with our game, to scared of massive scorelines so we basically allow heritage teams to play instead of nations like Russia, South Africa, Canada and Serbia.

So now we have effectively Samoa, Tonga, Italy, Lebanon, and Scotland basically going to be heritage nations at the next RLWC (which is no change from the past two World Cups for these nations)....and it could increase depending on whether USA and Ireland are true to their words about using less heritage players...

5 Countries which are heritage are more of embarrassment to the game then a having nations like Russia losing by 80 points.

I guess what is and isn't an embarrassment depends on your own perspectives. For me, the World cup is our pinnacle event and should include the best players in the world. Its our one regular opportunity to promote the game internationally and to try to build the kitty of the RILF. Sorry, but Russia being smashed by 140 points in the WC tournament is not the way to promote the game, and at this stage of international development we need to be open and just get some runs on the board and money in the bank. Stop comparing how other codes do international stuff, we're not them for the many reasons that are discussed here. We need the money so that we can go back and develop countries grass roots... when that happens, serious domestic comps can develop, player pools will grow, then maybe you can toughen rules if you need to. Are our eligibility rules (apart from the new rep tier 1 and 2 teams) that different from other codes anyway? Is its application just more noticeable because of where we are in our development cycle.

As has been pointed out by posters here, there has been a shit load happening in the period 2000 - present and all is not gloomy. But if you put it in that perspective, internationally its 1910 again and we're just getting started, while other codes are in 2016, but really, who gives a f**k. Its our game, its what it is, its moving forward, and we need an attitude of whatever it takes, not thats how they do it so we have to too. Now more than ever, there seems to actually be a desire to grow internationally and the only way is up. Been mentioned here before too, its all about perception.... Yawnion is nowhere near the globally played game its made out... sure they play in a few places, but the standard is no shitter in many cases than our fledglings. Build some high quality entertaining WCs, make US 2025 a success and see how we're looking then.

 

[hutch]

There would be no problem with majority heritage teams if these players were forced to commit to these nations. As it stands, our rules allow players to wait until they miss out on their first preference before "putting their hand up" for another nation.

I am in favour of a minimum domestic qualified quota per squad/team.

 

[LeagueXIII]

Why don't the big countries ie. Australia and England help fund the player payments for test matches.
Hopefully this would help in stopping player movement between nations, particularly the pacific countries.

 

[jim_57]

I'd like to see countries who meet certain domestic/homegrown player criteria get first shot at big tournaments. Set a minimum criteria for nations to qualify for 1st chance qualifiers, then another tournament for those who don't meet the criteria and those that missed their first chance

 

[thorson1987]

I think there are some changes that could be made, as I mentioned in the match thread, but I don't think this is it - I prefer the grandparent rule scaling back to a parent rule.
If Russia qualified for the WC they would be destroyed, more embarrassing for the sport on a far bigger stage, if that's what we're concerned about.
Consistency of rules across tournaments is ideal.

Only issue I have with this is someone whose parents were both born in Australia but all their grandparents were born in Tonga for example.

Why shouldn't someone of 100% Tongan heritage be allowed to play for Tonga.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

When they're not born in Tonga, haven't lived there, and their parents weren't born there either - if they were the only rules that qualified them.

Someone's grandparents might all be born in Australia but all of their parents might be from some other country, thus making them "100%" of that heritage. There has to be a line somewhere and the grandparent rule gets it wrong. Virtually no one honestly identifies their nationality based on where their grandparents are from unless they or their parents were born or lived there as well. It just doesn't happen. So why have a rule that allows it? People might identify their "heritage" this way, but not their nationality.

 

[siv]

This is where we should look to soccer as a guide

Automatic Qualifiers
- Host Nation
- Previous RLWC Winners
- Previous RLWC Runners Up
- Confederations Cup winners

After that teams need to qualify

 

[langpark]

Guys, every time this discussion comes up, the elephant in the room remains the same: THE PACIFIC NATIONS. That's the reason, this mess will never get sorted. If eligibility rules get tightened, they have no teams.

 

[Pommy]

Why don't the big countries ie. Australia and England help fund the player payments for test matches.
Hopefully this would help in stopping player movement between nations, particularly the pacific countries.

The big countries don't even need to put any money in. They could just use integrity in who they select.
If Semi wasn't picked for Australia as he shouldn't have been he would just play for Fiji and money wouldn't even be an issue.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Not true re Pacific nations. They all have domestic leagues to select whatever the required number of players will be from. The vast majority of their players are either born in the islands or have a parent or two born there so they would still qualify even if the GP rule was scrapped. If it was one nation for life they'd also still have plenty of pro and semi pro players. There's not really any reasonable excuse for the Pacific sides not to comply to stricter rules. The only area in which they might struggle would be if the minimum domestic standards asked for an amount of domestic clubs, player numbers or juniors that these small nations would not be able to meet, but the existing standards that haven't been enforced are pretty easy to meet anyway, even for the small nations.

 

[Pommy]

This is where we should look to soccer as a guide

Automatic Qualifiers
- Host Nation
- Previous RLWC Winners
- Previous RLWC Runners Up
- Confederations Cup winners

After that teams need to qualify

In football only the host nation gets a pass. Better teams are seeded in their groups but Germany to San Marino everyone else played in qualifiers.

 

[kiwileaguefan]

http://rrlf.ru/poslednyaya-putyovka-na-kubok-mira-2017/#more-1275

Russian Bears head coach Denis Korolev interview before departing for qualifiers:

Republic of Ireland as our next rival Italy, extensive use of invitation option in the numbers of British and Australian rugby. How such a flawed approach to the development of Rugby League? Will Russia, Serbia, Ukraine and other countries, developing rugby league try to stop the shaft foreign players within their own country, which literally swept Italy, Malta, Lebanon? - Just when we were in Dublin, held the Congress of the European Federation of rugby league, where I was raised this question. In fact, no such limitation of foreign players is very hinders the development of rugby league, especially in countries such as Serbia, Russia and many others. Contact with the World Cup is a huge impetus to the development of rugby league for these countries, but it is almost impossible when you go out to play against players of this level. I hope that the international federation still adopts a law on the limitation of foreign players in the national team.

Interestingly reading on the Wales RL site that the The tournament regulations state every nation must have four players in their matchday 19-man squads who meet the domestic quota rulings.

 

[adamkungl]

As noble as it is to play a 100% home grown team, it's too much of a swing in the opposite direction. They simply aren't good enough. Like other nations, they should use heritage players to raise their own standard and at least put them in the running.