What a dilemma this whole rugby league world cup qualification series conjures. Should the sport be rewarding the countries that have done the most on grassroots development, only to see them embarrassed at the World Cup? Or should they bolster weaker countries that have plenty of genes floating around in rugby league hotbeds to make them competitive, though thereby creating a false impression of their state of development?
I dont want to imply that Italy and Lebanon have done less than Serbia and Russia to develop the game, but I do want to imply that Russia and Serbia would be more than competitive against Lebanon and Italy teams that comprised home-grown or locally nurtured talent.
Last weekends results (Italy 92 Russia 6; Lebanon 96 Serbia 4) were an embarrassment. Not for Serbia and Russia, who sent their strongest boys into battle, but for Lebanon and Italy, who saw their strongest boys watching from the sidelines as their fight was usurped by English-speaking imports; false countrymen who had grown up far away from Italy and Lebanon, likely having had a rugby league ball placed in their hands on the first day of school.
According to reports, the Lebanon 17 included just one player actually playing in the Lebanese league. The Serbia 17, in contrast, included 14 home-based players, one home-grown Serb now based in France and two imports playing in the UKs highest Amateur league.
Ask the rugby league tourists of BARLA or the British Community Lions which of these four countries have the most competitive national rugby league teams and the answer is unlikely to be Italy or Lebanon.
Anyone whos followed the grassroots development of rugby league in the four countries currently competing in the World Cup 2013 European Qualifiers must know that a great injustice is being done to the game itself.
But I dont want to merely rant about whats already been done and is soon to be dusted in Belgrade in late October. Rather Id like to suggest a remedy.
I suggest that the next RLWC, presumably to take place in 2017, be a two-tiered competition comprising a World Cup and a World Shield, or something to that effect.
Both championships should include ten teams, i.e. Cup: Australia, New Zealand, England, Wales, Ireland, France, Papua New Guinea, Tonga, Samoa, Cook Islands and some other established nation; Shield: Canada, Czech Republic, Germany, Italy, Lebanon, Malta, Russia, Serbia, South Africa, USA or similar development countries like Jamaica.
There would be no restrictions on the origins, residence or playing level of players competing in the World Cup, but players in the World Shield would have to be home-grown or playing in that countrys domestic league or an equivalent league.
The Shield games could be played as curtain-raisers to the Cup games and development countries would be able to take pride in competing against players at a similar level of development.
Alternatively, we could have a stand-alone amateur rugby league World Cup and European Cup. Even that would more than likely be won by the British Community Lions, but at least not with 90-point victories every game.
In many ways we are all indebted to the rugby league folk of New South Wales and Queensland for being at the forefront of rugby league advancement for so long, but the trade-off has become a diluted global development dominated by the multiculturalism of Sydney to the detriment of the long-term growth of the sport.
The Russian RFL is seeking greater recognition from the Russian Ministry for Sport. How much do you think these RLWC qualifiers will help their cause?
The Serbian RFL has taken massive strides in developing the game locally, but finds its attempts to spark media interest thwarted by its own reluctance to publicise news of crushing defeats at the hands of other non-established RL countries!
We have the greatest game and great people who are working to develop it beyond the heartlands, but its time the methods were rethought if we want to ensure that work is successful.
Mark R. Pullen,
Red Star Belgrade RLFC
I dont want to imply that Italy and Lebanon have done less than Serbia and Russia to develop the game, but I do want to imply that Russia and Serbia would be more than competitive against Lebanon and Italy teams that comprised home-grown or locally nurtured talent.
Last weekends results (Italy 92 Russia 6; Lebanon 96 Serbia 4) were an embarrassment. Not for Serbia and Russia, who sent their strongest boys into battle, but for Lebanon and Italy, who saw their strongest boys watching from the sidelines as their fight was usurped by English-speaking imports; false countrymen who had grown up far away from Italy and Lebanon, likely having had a rugby league ball placed in their hands on the first day of school.
According to reports, the Lebanon 17 included just one player actually playing in the Lebanese league. The Serbia 17, in contrast, included 14 home-based players, one home-grown Serb now based in France and two imports playing in the UKs highest Amateur league.
Ask the rugby league tourists of BARLA or the British Community Lions which of these four countries have the most competitive national rugby league teams and the answer is unlikely to be Italy or Lebanon.
Anyone whos followed the grassroots development of rugby league in the four countries currently competing in the World Cup 2013 European Qualifiers must know that a great injustice is being done to the game itself.
But I dont want to merely rant about whats already been done and is soon to be dusted in Belgrade in late October. Rather Id like to suggest a remedy.
I suggest that the next RLWC, presumably to take place in 2017, be a two-tiered competition comprising a World Cup and a World Shield, or something to that effect.
Both championships should include ten teams, i.e. Cup: Australia, New Zealand, England, Wales, Ireland, France, Papua New Guinea, Tonga, Samoa, Cook Islands and some other established nation; Shield: Canada, Czech Republic, Germany, Italy, Lebanon, Malta, Russia, Serbia, South Africa, USA or similar development countries like Jamaica.
There would be no restrictions on the origins, residence or playing level of players competing in the World Cup, but players in the World Shield would have to be home-grown or playing in that countrys domestic league or an equivalent league.
The Shield games could be played as curtain-raisers to the Cup games and development countries would be able to take pride in competing against players at a similar level of development.
Alternatively, we could have a stand-alone amateur rugby league World Cup and European Cup. Even that would more than likely be won by the British Community Lions, but at least not with 90-point victories every game.
In many ways we are all indebted to the rugby league folk of New South Wales and Queensland for being at the forefront of rugby league advancement for so long, but the trade-off has become a diluted global development dominated by the multiculturalism of Sydney to the detriment of the long-term growth of the sport.
The Russian RFL is seeking greater recognition from the Russian Ministry for Sport. How much do you think these RLWC qualifiers will help their cause?
The Serbian RFL has taken massive strides in developing the game locally, but finds its attempts to spark media interest thwarted by its own reluctance to publicise news of crushing defeats at the hands of other non-established RL countries!
We have the greatest game and great people who are working to develop it beyond the heartlands, but its time the methods were rethought if we want to ensure that work is successful.
Mark R. Pullen,
Red Star Belgrade RLFC
