england want rl ashes on the line

[roughyedspud]

haha

can't we just create a new one off trophy?? much in the same way england & scotland play for the calcutta cup in union?

we can keep the legacy of the 'ASHES' & 'BASKERVILLE shield' for any possible future Great Britain tours..but have new trophies for games between ENGLAND & australia and NZ.....

 

[roughyedspud]

richard lewis wades in.....think he might have read my previous post though..:lol:

http://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyle...STORY_NAME=rleague/09/09/02/RUGBYL_Ashes.html

 

[druzik]

richard lewis wades in.....think he might have read my previous post though..:lol:

http://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyle...STORY_NAME=rleague/09/09/02/RUGBYL_Ashes.html

though do you put it on line in just the round robin game or if its a Australia v England final there as well?

 

[The Observer]

not going to happen...

england,wales,scotland & ireland is the future...GB is'nt

Under devolution and this 4N qualification model, England has become the de-facto GB team (as griff also said), and Wales/Scotland/Ireland are minnows that will struggle to develop into Tier 1 nations. Exactly what Harris and Cunningham vocalised their fear of this outcome as a consequence of devolution, and it has played out with the defections of Dave Halley and Danny Brough to England, and previously players like Keith Mason, Lee Gilmour and Richard Horne.

can't we just create a new one off trophy?? mcan't we just create a new one off trophy?? much in the same way england & scotland play for the calcutta cup in union?

we can keep the legacy of the 'ASHES' & 'BASKERVILLE shield' for any possible future Great Britain tours..but have new trophies for games between ENGLAND & australia and NZ.....uch in the same way england & scotland play for the calcutta cup in union?

That is a good idea.

griff, it seems like you'd like a cricket style international calendar. It has some positive features (there is tradition in it), but I'd advocate a RU style calendar, which still has room for traditional Lions/Kangaroos tours, and more tests (like Home Nations Grand slam, reciprocated with the HN touring south and playing Aus/NZ etc).

 

[hutch]

Under devolution and this 4N qualification model, England has become the de-facto GB team (as griff also said), and Wales/Scotland/Ireland are minnows that will struggle to develop into Tier 1 nations. Exactly what Harris and Cunningham vocalised their fear of this outcome as a consequence of devolution, and it has played out with the defections of Dave Halley and Danny Brough to England, and previously players like Keith Mason, Lee Gilmour and Richard Horne.

i disgree, it will give these nations the chance to develop their own identity, and develop rugby league in these countries. it is going to take time and real development. a true scotsman or welshman would never play for england. propping up these countries with players who miss out on gb, just as we do for the samoan and tongan teams does nothing for rugby league in those countries. real development is what we need, so that in 15-20 years time we have got real national teams who are competitive.

 

[The Observer]

i disgree, it will give these nations the chance to develop their own identity, and develop rugby league in these countries.

These objectives aren't mutually exclusive. In test Rugby Union, the Celtic nations have a strong individual identity and presence. A Lions tour every 4 years will be a bonus, and the Great Britain 7s Olympic team will be a cherry on top.

a true scotsman or welshman would never play for england.

You are mistaken, players will always play at the highest level. Take cricket:

Ed Joyce - abandoned Ireland to play for England, despite being:

widely regarded as one of the best cricketers produced by the Republic of Ireland.

Ireland could have used him in last week's ODI against England.

Gavin Hamilton - abandoned Scotland for play for 1 test for England, and as a consequence:

Hamilton's appearance in England's cause had been brief indeed, but was also to prove costly to him personally, as it meant that he would have to re-qualify to play for Scotland, a process that would take four years.

You'll notice that cricket has a stand-down policy for changing countries, not a One Nation for Life policy.

Robert Croft and Simon Jones - don't even have an independent Welsh team to play for, even though cricket has a long presence in Glamorgan (the venue for 1st Ashes test).

 

[roughyedspud]

your argument about players defecting to england nly holds water if these players end up being picked for england......and none of them will..none of the current bunch anyway..it'll all settle down anyway,once players realize that it is'nt a closed shop,which it isn't


and don't use cricket as an example...scotland & ireland don't have test playing status so the likes of ed joyce and gavin hamilton have to play for england if they want to play test matches...as for wales...the full name of the ECB..is the england & wales cricket board..hence why we played the 1st ashes test in wales..so the likes of simon jones did'nt pick england over wales..

but anyway,getting of point...any news out of the ARL about agreeing to the ashes being up for grabs in one of games?

 

[pcpp]

There are three matches against England in the 4N from 2009-2011!

Play these as a best of 3 for the Ashes.

 

[roughyedspud]

spread over 3 years......interesting.

but we might play each other more than that say for instance we meet in the 4nations final....then what?

 

[pcpp]

The obvious solution would be not to count them.

Group matches take a lot bigger meaning with the Ashes while there is the 4N trophy to play for in the final.

I think you could potentially take this concept for all the 4N group matches over a 3 year period between Australia, NZ and England. England and NZ play for the Baskerville Shield, Australia and NZ play for the Bill Kelly trophy?

 

[roughyedspud]

i think it'll just drag on too long if you don't include the final as part of a series

 

[druzik]

Well yerr POms get your wish

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...-line-next-month/story-e6frexnr-1225769356920

Ashes go on line next month​

AUSTRALIAN Rugby League officials have decided to put their 36-year domination over England and Great Britain for the sport's Ashes on the line in a one-off game next month.


ARL chief executive Geoff Carr has confirmed that Australia and England will play one-off matches for the 101-year-old title over the next three seasons, beginning on October 31 in Wigan during the Four Nations series. The system will then be reviewed.

The trophy is normally contested over a three-match series and former Australian captains were divided over an English proposal that it be handed to the winner of a one-off game.

"We decided that we will put the trophy on the line in that game at the end of next month," Carr said.

"There was some suggestion that it be decided based on however many games we play in a given season but we can't say for sure that England or Australia would make a Four Nations final.

"So it's going to be one game per year for the next three years."
The Ashes trophy is currently on display at the National Museum in Canberra and will be transported to Britain for the Four Nations, which kicks off on October 23.

Series between Australia and England, the Northern Union or Great Britain have been known as the Ashes since 1908. But there are no such series planned until after the 2013 World Cup, with Australia to have 2012 off at the request of players.

Britain won the trophy in Australia in 1970, the green and golds regained it in the UK during 1973 and have held it ever since.

Current Australian captain Darren Lockyer and predecessors Laurie Daley, Arthur Beetson, John Raper and Bob McCarthy have said they are opposed to the title being decided in one match.

But Brad Fittler, Max Krilich and Gorden Tallis had no problem with the idea, first raised publicly by England skipper Jamie Peacock at the beginning of last week.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

Truely terrible. Shows no respect for the Ashes.

 

[hutch]

Truely terrible. Shows no respect for the Ashes.

i do agree with you to an extent, but we just wont have a chance to play for it for 5 years, this is the only way it could happen. to be honest, im more excited and nervous about the game v england now, it has much more of a meaning than before. its a pretty ballsy move from the arl.

i would prefer it if it was aus v gb not england in a series for the ashes though.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

I suppose there is no point in complaining about it now, whats done is done. Lets make this game as big as possible.

 

[pcpp]

Too bad this is at a 25,000 seat stadium - which are OK for games against NZ but this game deserves much better.

There were nearly 40,000 at City of Manchester Stadium for Australia v GB in 2004 but we haven't been there since for some reason.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

As I said on TRL, what a joke. A one off game in the middle of a bigger series to decide the Ashes? It has never been anything other than a three games series and that's the way it should stay. And to have it in a small stadium in a small town too. Utter garbage from our imcompetent administrators once again. Another RL tradition turned into a mockery.

 

[jim_57]

with Australia to have 2012 off at the request of players.

WHAT?!?!?! :x

 

[jim_57]

I don't mind it, it adds a bit more interest within the tournament. I would like it if a team had to win 3 games straight to re-claim the ashes. So if Australia win in the 4N England have to beat them 3 times straight to win them back.

 

[roughyedspud]

it's going to be the biggest,most hyped games since the 1992 RLWC final.....



but as someone else said its a shame its not at CoMs...