European Championship 2020 and Beyond

[Storm13]

On the Chasing Kangaroos podcast it is believed the new agreed upon format will be a 17 team group format with relegation and promotion played every two years starting 2020. Three groups of 6,6 and 5. Also with England taking part. Also it was mentioned the first round would be a mid year test like the NZ vs Tonga test in the southern hemisphere. The mid year test for England is vs France but France are not to keen as they will face the full strength side while the rest of the nations will get the B team.

Group 1
England
France
Wales
Ireland
Scotland
Italy

Other groups not known as of yet.

 

[welshmagpie]

On the Chasing Kangaroos podcast it is believed the new agreed upon format will be a 17 team group format with relegation and promotion played every two years starting 2020. Three groups of 6,6 and 5. Also with England taking part. Also it was mentioned the first round would be a mid year test like the NZ vs Tonga test in the southern hemisphere. The mid year test for England is vs France but France are not to keen as they will face the full strength side while the rest of the nations will get the B team.

Group 1
England
France
Wales
Ireland
Scotland
Italy

Other groups not known as of yet.

The latter bit about France vs. England was regarding plans for 2018, not 2020.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

I'm torn on this. England being involved give it so much credibility, probably gets it televised which brings crowds and sponsors etc. But I don't want the English national team to suffer by not playing Australia and New Zealand every second year.

 

[Perth Tiger]

I'm torn on this. England being involved give it so much credibility, probably gets it televised which brings crowds and sponsors etc. But I don't want the English national team to suffer by not playing Australia and New Zealand every second year.

Yeah there are positives and negatives on a full strength England either playing or not. The traditional RL problem is though which ever option is chosen, the majority of fans and media will focus on the negative aspect and death ride the whole project until it dies.

Personally it doesn’t bother me either way. The important thing is to develop regular competition that can be built on.

 

[Irish-bulldog]

The northern hemisphere has been falling behind for the last 20 years, they need regular competitions, they need to do something different lol

 

[roughyedspud]

The northern hemisphere has been falling behind for the last 20 years, they need regular competitions, they need to do something different lol

There's been no shortage of competitions

 

[Pommy]

On that podcast they mentioned not being allowed more than 4 or 5 players not in the domestic comp. I can understand the idea behind heritage players but next season Canberra will have 5 English players alone.

 

[latingringo101]

I think it's necessary for England to be involved in this. It's the only way smaller nations will develop and get better by playing these kind of games.

 

[Pommy]

I think it's necessary for England to be involved in this. It's the only way smaller nations will develop and get better by playing these kind of games.

I have no issue with England doing this but there needs to be assurances England are going to get game with Aus, NZ and even Tonga in the off years.
England going backwards by only playing these euro teams will do nobody any good at all.
Also if the other nations want a full England as opposed to a Knights then it should be a full England. No restrictions on players playing outside the Super League.

 

[adamkungl]

England don't play Aus most years anyway, so nothing lost there sadly.

Long term, other Euro nations raising their level (which can only done by playing the likes of England) is of huge benefit to England, but it is a LONG term project which this sport traditionally struggles with.

Regional Championships in year 2 and tours in years 1 and 3 is my preferred structure for Int Rugby League going forward. It's neat, easy to understand and plan for, gives opportunities for all nations to win trophies and get big games.
England (or GB, if they must) should play Aus and NZ at least 2 of every 4 years, plus the very likely World Cup ties.

The problem is we have things like the upcoming GB tour where Australia just refuse to participate. Can't blame this nonsense on the European Championship plans.

 

[Springs09]

I'm torn on this. England being involved give it so much credibility, probably gets it televised which brings crowds and sponsors etc. But I don't want the English national team to suffer by not playing Australia and New Zealand every second year.

If they do it right there should be no reason why England can't play in a Euro comp and host Australia or NZ in the same year.

If they do the full 6 nations thing then it probably shouldn't be every 2nd year. If they do groups of 3 or 4 they could easily play 3 or 4 games in the Euro comp then 3x tests v Australia/NZ. Australia or NZ could play tour games against other Euro Nations as well.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

If they do it right there should be no reason why England can't play in a Euro comp and host Australia or NZ in the same year.

If they do the full 6 nations thing then it probably shouldn't be every 2nd year. If they do groups of 3 or 4 they could easily play 3 or 4 games in the Euro comp then 3x tests v Australia/NZ. Australia or NZ could play tour games against other Euro Nations as well.

I would actually love that. I'm probably used to nations in RL not committing to more than 4 or 5 internationals in one year.

 

[hutch]

On that podcast they mentioned not being allowed more than 4 or 5 players not in the domestic comp. I can understand the idea behind heritage players but next season Canberra will have 5 English players alone.

Domestic players should mean players developed domestically regardless of where they currently play. That is what the rule was originally going to be introduced for in 2007/08 for the World Cup.

 

[Pommy]

England don't play Aus most years anyway, so nothing lost there sadly.

Long term, other Euro nations raising their level (which can only done by playing the likes of England) is of huge benefit to England, but it is a LONG term project which this sport traditionally struggles with.

Regional Championships in year 2 and tours in years 1 and 3 is my preferred structure for Int Rugby League going forward. It's neat, easy to understand and plan for, gives opportunities for all nations to win trophies and get big games.
England (or GB, if they must) should play Aus and NZ at least 2 of every 4 years, plus the very likely World Cup ties.

The problem is we have things like the upcoming GB tour where Australia just refuse to participate. Can't blame this nonsense on the European Championship plans.

I mean we don’t have to play all of those teams every off year just make sure England are kept in a supply of decent games. If Tonga NZ takes off and becomes a yearly event it could leave us with only Australia to try and get games with.
Just something I hope is kept in mind really.

Domestic players should mean players developed domestically regardless of where they currently play. That is what the rule was originally going to be introduced for in 2007/08 for the World Cup.

Im hoping it was just a misspeak on that podcast but I think union have some stupid rules like that.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Domestic players should mean players developed domestically regardless of where they currently play. That is what the rule was originally going to be introduced for in 2007/08 for the World Cup.

It should probably include players that are born in that country too, regardless of where they are developed provided that theyare not eligible to play for any other nation.