Pacific Championships 2024

[Billythekid]

Fiji this year? Sure, but not really fair to lump them in with Cook Islands IMO. Last 2 times Fiji have played NZ they won by 2 and lost by 6.

Fiji have many Fijian born players and aren’t purely reliant on heritage guys. The Catch 22 is I don’t see the likes of Koroisau, Bula & the Saifitis helping out often whilst Fiji are in tier 2, but without players like them Fiji will likely never make it out of tier 2. Of all the Island nations they seem to get the least commitment from the heritage guys.

These things go in waves though, in 5 years Samoa and/or Tonga’s heritage buy-in might drop off, likewise Fiji’s could increase.

That last point is a really good one that shouldn’t be overlooked. Unlike all those countries PNG isn’t reliant on heritage at all. They have the most potential to see a continual improvement and eventually join the top tier without having to worry about their best players suddenly getting a change of heart and going off to play for someone else.

 

[Last Week]

It's all well and good to expose other nations to the top tier, but the reality is that England, NZ and Australia are the strongest rugby league nations. And it is a disgrace that England hasn't played NZ since 2018, or Australia since 2017. Matches between those three are the marquee events of the international calendar.

Just bring back the Four Nations. Once every 4 years. It's so obviously simple.

Have it owned by the RFL, NRL and NZRL. The 'hosting' League can determine qualification however they deem fit. (ie, when hosted in England, a European team plays. Or, they can invite another Pacific team, up to them)

World Cup
Pacific Championships/European Championship
4 Nations
Tours

Repeat.

 

[Billythekid]

It's all well and good to expose other nations to the top tier, but the reality is that England, NZ and Australia are the strongest rugby league nations. And it is a disgrace that England hasn't played NZ since 2018, or Australia since 2017. Matches between those three are the marquee events of the international calendar.

Just bring back the Four Nations. Once every 4 years. It's so obviously simple.

Have it owned by the RFL, NRL and NZRL. The 'hosting' League can determine qualification however they deem fit. (ie, when hosted in England, a European team plays. Or, they can invite another Pacific team, up to them)

World Cup
Pacific Championships/European Championship
4 Nations
Tours

Repeat.

I generally agree that we haven’t seen enough matches between the big 3 and in particular it’s a huge missed opportunity how rarely we play England (personally I think having England involved always adds more interest).

Having said that let’s not do a disservice to Tonga and Samoa fans. They’ve been showing up in force and considering right now crowds are really what is making these tournaments money that’s important. Take this year I’m pretty confident more Tongan fans will attend games than Aus or NZ fans. Also the 2 best rating games will likely end up involving Tonga. Their is clearly interest in these sides right now and we should be capitalising on that.

 

[Wb1234]

Samoa and Tonga won’t get weaker

Not given how they dominate juniors and nrl and player numbers

And eventually we will be getting the talent from the islands directly that go to union

If you look at Fiji Samoa and Tonga in union and see how many players they have produced that’s an additional talent pool

During the last union World Cup they use a photo to promote a Tongan ru World Cup game. They got mixed up and used one from league

In Tonga the league team would be more well known and probably the same with Samoa

The long term goal for the nrl / arl is to keep the pacific cup going. The nrl could then have developed 7 really strong test nations that’s a core for a World Cup

England aren’t far off either especially with the English contingent in the nrl

The money that can be made from the intentional game could be worth hundreds of millions pa to the game

A second nrl side in nz and one in png are going to give a huge boost to those teams

I wouldn’t even knock back a pacific islands nrl side one day (6 games in Fiji 3 in Samoa 3 in Tonga)

 

[Wb1234]

It's all well and good to expose other nations to the top tier, but the reality is that England, NZ and Australia are the strongest rugby league nations. And it is a disgrace that England hasn't played NZ since 2018, or Australia since 2017. Matches between those three are the marquee events of the international calendar.

Just bring back the Four Nations. Once every 4 years. It's so obviously simple.

Have it owned by the RFL, NRL and NZRL. The 'hosting' League can determine qualification however they deem fit. (ie, when hosted in England, a European team plays. Or, they can invite another Pacific team, up to them)

World Cup
Pacific Championships/European Championship
4 Nations
Tours

Repeat.

Tonga literally just beat nz

 

[Last Week]

Having said that let’s not do a disservice to Tonga and Samoa fans. They’ve been showing up in force and considering right now crowds are really what is making these tournaments money that’s important. Take this year I’m pretty confident more Tongan fans will attend games than Aus or NZ fans. Also the 2 best rating games will likely end up involving Tonga. Their is clearly interest in these sides right now and we should be capitalising on that.

The crowds and passion that Tonga and Samoa are bringing are fantastic and the culture and competitiveness on display is the highlight of these tournaments.

But let's be clear, the money is not going to the IRL, it's going to the ARLC mainly.

 

[Wb1234]

The crowds and passion that Tonga and Samoa are bringing are fantastic and the culture and competitiveness on display is the highlight of these tournaments.

But let's be clear, the money is not going to the IRL, it's going to the ARLC mainly.

Tonga and Samoa both toured England and the arl didn’t get a cent from it

 

[Perth Red]

Tonga and Samoa both toured England and the arl didn’t get a cent from it

No but I bet that the players in those sides got more than 1500 pound a game!

 

[Wb1234]

No but I bet that the players in those sides got more than 1500 pound a game!

That’s why the arlc had 300 million in net assets and the rfl has zero (except the lease at odsal lol)

 

[Last Week]

That’s why the arlc had 300 million in net assets and the rfl has zero (except the lease at odsal lol)

Moronic statement.

 

[Wb1234]

Moronic statement.

Remember when you said Tonga aren’t one of the top teams

 

[Last Week]

Remember when you said Tonga aren’t one of the top teams

You can argue with false equivalencies all you like, doesn't change your intent behind your antagonistic and idiotic statement.

If you want online arguments, go to Facebook.

 

[Billythekid]

The crowds and passion that Tonga and Samoa are bringing are fantastic and the culture and competitiveness on display is the highlight of these tournaments.

But let's be clear, the money is not going to the IRL, it's going to the ARLC mainly

Ultimately with how things are right now the international game won’t grow unless the ARLC is interested. If these games suddenly start drawing huge crowds and ratings and the ARLC see some dollar signs you’ll see them start pushing international games more.

Ultimately whoever is benefitting you won’t see a concerted push unless these games show themselves as a potential money spinner.

 

[Last Week]

Ultimately with how things are right now the international game won’t grow unless the ARLC is interested. If these games suddenly start drawing huge crowds and ratings and the ARLC see some dollar signs you’ll see them start pushing international games more.

Ultimately whoever is benefitting you won’t see a concerted push unless these games show themselves as a potential money spinner.

Completely agree. Just a shame that they're not as keen to assist or even partake in European development. Or any development outside of the Pacific.

 

[Wb1234]

Completely agree. Just a shame that they're not as keen to assist or even partake in European development. Or any development outside of the Pacific.

Is this satire ?

 

[titoelcolombiano]

1. Pacific Cup 5 Nations

2. Aus, NZ, Tonga, Samoa taking turns to tour England AND France and sitting out the Pacific Cup to do so.

3. Sorry Cook Islands, but with all due respect, your country has a population of 10,000. We can't have a team like that making a world cup at the expense of France or Wales for example.

4. Get Lebanon to play the Pacific Cup team that has the bye every week or send them to England with the other touring nation and play a 4 Nations every year with England and France.

On Lebanon, why we are not leveraging the large Lebanese communities in Sydney, Brisbane and the UK for the game's benefit is beyond me. Like Polynesians, the Lebanese have spread out everywhere. Like Polynesians, they will get behind anything that their country has success in and like Polynesians (the ones in Sydney especially) tend to actually like our game.

Answer me this, what's the difference between promoting competitive Tongan and Samoan largely heritage sides with big fan bases and promotng a competitive Lebanese largely heritage side with a big fan base? I can't see the difference. Plus as a bonus, the game is actually played in schools and Universities in Lebanon.

 

[Wb1234]

They were offered a five-star city hotel. But Tonga chose to stay here instead

While the Kangaroos based themselves at Magenta Shores on the Central Coast, their opponents were happy to settle for more modest accommodation ahead of this weekend’s Pacific Championships final.

www.smh.com.au

 

[adamkungl]

My biggest problems with the Pacific Cup as things stand are:

1, a team out every year which undermines its ability to have a coherent narrative with the average fans and impacts its viability. Samoa out this year deprives the cup of at least 2 big blockbuster crowds to give England a leg-up. England obviously needs a leg-up, so I'll come back to this point later. Australia out next year. If they win on Sunday, they won't be defending their crown. If they by some miracle got relegated, they wouldn't have to face the consequences. So its all a bit meaningless while we're chopping and changing top teams every year.

2, the 3 team format with byes. They could at least have cross-pool standalone tests to paper over it but it is just a dud format. At least we have a final unlike the 2019 Oceania Cup edition. Kangaroos not playing last week basically killed off any interest in the Australian papers despite a tantalising NZ v Tonga matchup. 4 Nations is the only worthwhile format that you can play in a month. 5 nations is a dud format, takes too long, still has byes.


On Promotion and Relegation. I like it. Stakes are important, and giving all playing nations a shot is important. I don't think the organisers will like it if we lose NZ to relegation next year. But then again, NZ are probably the worst drawing team of Australia, Samoa, Tonga, NZ so... tough shit? They were complacent despite injury outages. And I suspect some of those outages could have dug a bit deeper if they cared.

Having the tournament split into 2 tiers does a lot to manage the financial viability and public interest. Kangaroos v 5th and 6th placed teams over a 6 week period is not something the NRL is interested in bankrolling. The Bowl being cheaper to run allows for more games in places like Suva. And crucially gives every WC-eligible nation a fair shot at the big time, which the other Rugby does not.
My preference is to maintain and expand the current format, with no one out touring England and the top teams appearing every edition. But it seems like the current strategy will persist until at least 2030 where 1 Pacific team goes to England each year. So in that case I would have the tournament played annually with (examples as per mooted 2027 plans):
England series - 1 Pacific team (NZ).
Cup - Top 4 teams (Aus, Samoa, Tonga, PNG).
Bowl - remaining 1-2 pacific teams (Fiji, Cook Islands)+ Lebanon. + future expansion to include best Americas team.
Promotion playoff remains between Cup and Bowl.


On World Cup cycles... my suggestion has long been (Kangaroos events only for this illustration):
Year 1 - Pacific cup. No tours.
Year 2 - IRL 4 Nations featuring England.
Year 3 - England/GB tours alternating between the big 3.

But even so I can see it feels a bit spread thin and there's a certain appeal to playing the same events every year. As mentioned, looks like the NRL is going to favour an annual Pacific Cup with 1 nation ducking off to England each year. And despite the flaws i noted, it works. And should the NRL cut its rounds down with expansion, we could eventually see room for something akin to a short-form of the Union calendar, where we have every year.
1 mid-season test.
A touring window in October.
and an annual Pacific Cup in November.
In such a calendar the Kangaroos could play 8-9 games a year, and we wouldn't have the compromises of tours overlapping tournaments or only getting tours or tournaments in certain years.


And finally, on England...
It is frustrating that they are reliant on southern hemisphere teams as their only viable opposition. They could have France competitive within 5 years and Wales in 10, and have simply chosen not to support their neighbours. They have invented a criteria for Super League that could plant Toulouse permanently in first grade and decided instead to favour the status quo.
You can argue that it is not their responsibility, but what of their responsibility to themselves, to be able to sell the sport via internationals? They obviously recognise the problem because they are desperate for incoming tours. If the NRL decides at any moment that an annual Samoa v Tonga game is worth more than shipping them up to Wigan, England are left with nothing. And would hypocritically cry about Southern Hemisphere neglect of the International game while they revive rubbish like War of the Roses and leave France in the lurch. As always, they reap what they sew, but it's never their fault.

 

[Perth Red]

My biggest problems with the Pacific Cup as things stand are:

1, a team out every year which undermines its ability to have a coherent narrative with the average fans and impacts its viability. Samoa out this year deprives the cup of at least 2 big blockbuster crowds to give England a leg-up. England obviously needs a leg-up, so I'll come back to this point later. Australia out next year. If they win on Sunday, they won't be defending their crown. If they by some miracle got relegated, they wouldn't have to face the consequences. So its all a bit meaningless while we're chopping and changing top teams every year.

2, the 3 team format with byes. They could at least have cross-pool standalone tests to paper over it but it is just a dud format. At least we have a final unlike the 2019 Oceania Cup edition. Kangaroos not playing last week basically killed off any interest in the Australian papers despite a tantalising NZ v Tonga matchup. 4 Nations is the only worthwhile format that you can play in a month. 5 nations is a dud format, takes too long, still has byes.


On Promotion and Relegation. I like it. Stakes are important, and giving all playing nations a shot is important. I don't think the organisers will like it if we lose NZ to relegation next year. But then again, NZ are probably the worst drawing team of Australia, Samoa, Tonga, NZ so... tough shit? They were complacent despite injury outages. And I suspect some of those outages could have dug a bit deeper if they cared.

Having the tournament split into 2 tiers does a lot to manage the financial viability and public interest. Kangaroos v 5th and 6th placed teams over a 6 week period is not something the NRL is interested in bankrolling. The Bowl being cheaper to run allows for more games in places like Suva. And crucially gives every WC-eligible nation a fair shot at the big time, which the other Rugby does not.
My preference is to maintain and expand the current format, with no one out touring England and the top teams appearing every edition. But it seems like the current strategy will persist until at least 2030 where 1 Pacific team goes to England each year. So in that case I would have the tournament played annually with (examples as per mooted 2027 plans):
England series - 1 Pacific team (NZ).
Cup - Top 4 teams (Aus, Samoa, Tonga, PNG).
Bowl - remaining 1-2 pacific teams (Fiji, Cook Islands)+ Lebanon. + future expansion to include best Americas team.
Promotion playoff remains between Cup and Bowl.


On World Cup cycles... my suggestion has long been (Kangaroos events only for this illustration):
Year 1 - Pacific cup. No tours.
Year 2 - IRL 4 Nations featuring England.
Year 3 - England/GB tours alternating between the big 3.

But even so I can see it feels a bit spread thin and there's a certain appeal to playing the same events every year. As mentioned, looks like the NRL is going to favour an annual Pacific Cup with 1 nation ducking off to England each year. And despite the flaws i noted, it works. And should the NRL cut its rounds down with expansion, we could eventually see room for something akin to a short-form of the Union calendar, where we have every year.
1 mid-season test.
A touring window in October.
and an annual Pacific Cup in November.
In such a calendar the Kangaroos could play 8-9 games a year, and we wouldn't have the compromises of tours overlapping tournaments or only getting tours or tournaments in certain years.


And finally, on England...
It is frustrating that they are reliant on southern hemisphere teams as their only viable opposition. They could have France competitive within 5 years and Wales in 10, and have simply chosen not to support their neighbours. They have invented a criteria for Super League that could plant Toulouse permanently in first grade and decided instead to favour the status quo.
You can argue that it is not their responsibility, but what of their responsibility to themselves, to be able to sell the sport via internationals? They obviously recognise the problem because they are desperate for incoming tours. If the NRL decides at any moment that an annual Samoa v Tonga game is worth more than shipping them up to Wigan, England are left with nothing. And would hypocritically cry about Southern Hemisphere neglect of the International game while they revive rubbish like War of the Roses and leave France in the lurch. As always, they reap what they sew, but it's never their fault.

re Englands situation you are being very simplistic. Samoa and Tonga are competitive because over 50% of the NRL is made up of players (or heritage) from the pacific region. Even with Toulouse in SL there'd only be 25 or so starting French players in top tier. In reality for France to compete with England it either needs 5 or 6 French teams in Sl (which wont ever happen), every Sl team to have 4 or 5 French players in it (culture seems to prevent this) or a FT pro French league (which there is not enough media support for). Wales is even less likely now union is pro and that well has dried up.

 

[Wb1234]

He’s spot on about England

They have ruined the pacific cup

Their failure to develop France or wales and reliance upon southern hemisphere teams is a joke

The pacific cup is growing every year

And given how anti expansion the English league is the arl should take the same selfish attitude as English clubs did with Toronto London and toulose