What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

RLWC2007 plus international news

dimitri

First Grade
Messages
7,980
i agree

people say we only get 15,000 to our club games but what does the yawnyawn get?


about 2000


there hasnt been a rugby league world cup in aus for a very long time

once a bit of promotion is done
and the propoganda machine starts rolling it will be a success
 

Jeffles

Bench
Messages
3,412
2000 to a club game is ambitious. I've used to work at a couple of games.

But that's besides the point.

An RLWC would be nowhere near as successful as the YWC. But I'm not pretending it would be.

If there could be 15,000 averages at teh RLWC it would've done a helluva lot better than 2000 and it could spin money.

Look at the NRL, Struggle to get above 15 000. And you think international fans will pop out from nowhere?

No. and may I just say that NRL is second only to AFL in terms of attendances for club competitions. But I digress.

If you want to have a World Cup you should first wait a few years and get smaller tournaments working ala Six Nations and TriNations in RU.

There is a tri nations in RL as of next year and there is the European Nations Cup. All this RLWC talk is for 2007

Firstly, if there is no profit to be made from the RLWC (which there wouldn't be) how are the developing nations going to receive any money? If anything they will be out of pocket from having to send over a team in the first place.

If there was a profit n 1995 there can be a profit in 2007. As far as costs go, they are met by the organising body (like other World Cups). Teams are reimbursed for travel costs. Profits are then divided among national administrations. It's not brain surgery.

Secondly, australia didn't benefit at all from RLWC 2000 so i doubt they would benefit from RLWC 2007 even if they won. Kids in melbourne and adelaide wont suddenly start playing RL because the Roos beat Russia 100-0.

Well in 2007 there is the possibilit they could see Australia play at Hindmarsh Stadium (for example) in prime time as opposed to watching a telecast from the Boulevard in Hull at 5am. So it may do something for kids. I'm not saying all of them but it is well worth it. It was worth it for the ARU to have a 142-0 match.

The smaller nations have other tournaments to aspire to like the European Nations Cup and the Emerging Nations RLWC. Playing against the likes of Aust, NZ & GB shouldn't even enter there minds yet. It would be like Kostya Tzuyu fighting Lennox Lewis.

Agree. That's why I support a smaler RLWC as opposed to this 16 team crap being throw around.
 

dimitri

First Grade
Messages
7,980
16 teams is not crap

look at the 20 teams in the yawnyawn cup

if 16 teams is crap in league then what is 20 in yawnyawn

what is 142-0?

namibia
romania
etc etc


:roll:
 

Bob8

Juniors
Messages
287
ucantseeme said:
there are only 2 reasons to stage a RL world cup cup.

1. make money
2. find out who the best team in the world is

since we all know it is australia whose #1 and since the last RL cup was a financial disaster there is absoultely no need to stage a RL cup anytime until those 2 things change.

don't you think its strange that this RL cup talk only came up during the RU cup? i don't recall anyone mentioning it during the final series or state of origin.

The situation in GB is very bad when it comes to hosting games. The national media were against it, not just not favouring it, but actively against it.

International development would be helped greatly, there is now a domestic competition in the Lebanon. ALso it would raise the profile of the game where it's already played. One revelation to people in Blightly watching the RUWC is when they refer to how it's bound to take over RL. MOst people assumed RU was the only code in Oz, full stadia in Oz would greatly help the game here.

FFS, if you can fill stadia for RU you can certainly do it for RL.
 

In-goal

Bench
Messages
3,523
i am a fan of a 10 or 12 team cup anymore and i think were clutching at straws, i would use GB&I and not home nations first time around again.
Keep venues sizes down to the 20-30,000 seaters.

France buy this stage will have a pro club.

GB, NZ will be strengthend buy tri nations

Lebanon can only get better same with russia.

AUS
GB
NZ
France
Russia
Lebanon
P.N.G.

Should be used as the backbone of the competition, i think alot of work has to be done not only in the promotion of RL football in these countries but good development work in new areas.
 
Messages
2,957
Just some points to consider about the RLWC (put away your diehard league hat, and put on your general public hat for a moment):

The Union World Cup is on in France in 2007 and I'm pretty sure it's around the same months as this year's Cup. The influx of tourists to Australia for the 2003 RWC should be about the same (maybe larger due to being in Europe) for RWC 2007. Star Sports showed every game in the competition live throughout most of Asia.

I don't know about the cricket world cup (where will it be held anyway?) but Cricket, Union and League mostly share the same market (mainly former British colonies) If all three are to be held at the same time, League will probably be the weakest in terms of awareness of the competition and sport itself.

The RLWC if it is held in 2007 would have their work cut out for them. RLWC never had good marketing effort (look at the 2000 Cup). The 7 year gap may work for their benefit in terms of quality in teams instead of holding it next year (world cups generally runs in 4 year intervals) but may be a joke in the eyes of general public and sceptics.

Union may be boring to die hard league fans but it's the rugby code that average joes of the world know about, if at all. The general public knows little difference if any, between the two rugby codes. I often have to explain the difference when my friends an I watch the RWC, the League Ashes and the NRL games on Star Sports and ABC AsPac.
 

griff

Bench
Messages
3,322
Thunderstruck said:
Just some points to consider about the RLWC (put away your diehard league hat, and put on your general public hat for a moment):

The Union World Cup is on in France in 2007 and I'm pretty sure it's around the same months as this year's Cup. The influx of tourists to Australia for the 2003 RWC should be about the same (maybe larger due to being in Europe) for RWC 2007. Star Sports showed every game in the competition live throughout most of Asia.

I don't know about the cricket world cup (where will it be held anyway?) but Cricket, Union and League mostly share the same market (mainly former British colonies) If all three are to be held at the same time, League will probably be the weakest in terms of awareness of the competition and sport itself.

The RLWC if it is held in 2007 would have their work cut out for them. RLWC never had good marketing effort (look at the 2000 Cup). The 7 year gap may work for their benefit in terms of quality in teams instead of holding it next year (world cups generally runs in 4 year intervals) but may be a joke in the eyes of general public and sceptics.

Union may be boring to die hard league fans but it's the rugby code that average joes of the world know about, if at all. The general public knows little difference if any, between the two rugby codes. I often have to explain the difference when my friends an I watch the RWC, the League Ashes and the NRL games on Star Sports and ABC AsPac.

The 2007 Rugby Union World Cup will be held in September-October, and the Cricket World Cup in May in the West Indies.

I agree, there is no way in the world we should be trying to hold a World Cup in 2007. Holding it in the shadow of the Union World Cup would be disastrous. As you say, Rugby League operates in pretty much the same markets as Cricket and Union and most companies in these markets would have used up most of their sponsorship and TV rights budgets on the Cricket and Union World Cups, leaving little left over for the RLWC.

We should have learnt this lesson alerady. The 2000 RLWC was held when Australia was still in Olympic hangover mode, so failed to register with the sporting public.

Planning to hold a World Cup in 2007 shows the poor planning of Rugby League administrators. You have to be aware of what else is happening in environment at the time.

We have just had 3 of the all-time classic Ashes tests but having them on the same weekend as the RUWC Quarter-Finals, Semi-Finals and Final just ensured that the RUWC dominated coverage in the newspapers and on TV. Any league news was a drop in the ocean, and aside from a very small group of diehards who got up at 5am, if the average person heard about the Ashes series at all, all they would have heard was a 3-0 series win to Australia.

With a bit better planning we could have moved them back or forward a few weeks so they were played in a less cluttered environment.

The future of Rugby League internationally depends on the next RLWC being a success, and for it to be a success you have to stage it in an uncluttered environment. 2007 is clearly not the time, and 2008 isn't much better either.

2005 would be perfect - no Olympics, Commonwealth Games, World Cup soccer, RUWC, Cricket World Cup or European Soccer Championship to get in the way. The only thing is the World Athletics Championships, but that hardly rates with the sporting public in Australia or Britain.

With better planning from the RLIF we would already be well advanced in the planning of a 2005 World Cup.

But there is still more than enough time to ditch the proven failure that is the Tri-Series and stage a 2005 World Cup in Australia, New Zealand and Papua New Guinea.
 
Messages
789
I think the year shold be 2008, then we have 5 years for the smaller nations to improve. In the next five years we need as many international tests played as possible. So when the RLWC comes along we have nations who have a bit of experience.

As for the number of teams I think 10 or 12 is the right number, we can't have 16 it's just too many. Also GB and I need to play as one.

My idea for teams:
Australia
Great Britian and Ireland
New Zealand
France
Russia
Lebanon
PNG
Fiji

and the rest could be qualifiers.

Have two groups of Five then have semi-finals for the top two from each and then consolation finals for the rest to be played as warm up games.
 
Messages
11,677
Someone (forget who) also mentioned in the past forming a Pacific Islands team to play against the likes of Australia and New Zealand etc. I think this might be the way to go in a WC, especially if we used the grandfather rule and players from SL and NRL made up the team.

Personally I'd use them in a 4-way comp with NZ, NSW and Qld, but I'm sure all the islanders would come out in force to support them if they played in a WC.

USA could be an improved team if they do decide to make the AMNRL a professional competition as I have heard is possibly going to happen.

If Japan haven't gotten a Super 12 team then it might be a good opportunity to steal some players from Union over there and use them.

Russia will have a massive following ala World Sevens.

Lebanon will not only have a huge following, but may actually be able to play some decent football and be competitive.

France may not have the time to develop into a stronger side considering UTC will now be waiting until 06 to enter SL, but you would give them automatic qualifying anyways.
 

Razor

Coach
Messages
10,077
ucantseeme said:
Secondly, australia didn't benefit at all from RLWC 2000 so i doubt they would benefit from RLWC 2007 even if they won. Kids in melbourne and adelaide wont suddenly start playing RL because the Roos beat Russia 100-0.

And kids in Melbourne & Adelaide will start playing RU because the Wall's beat Nambibia 142-0?

btw Russia scored a try against the Roos.
 

Razor

Coach
Messages
10,077
Unknown Pleasures said:
I think if there is another world cup, we cant use the grandfather rule....it makes the whole thing a joke.

Rugby Union does and the majority of people haven't been saying the RUWC is a joke.
 
Messages
14,139
We're not treated the same as union. The media will carve us up if we go into another WC with bullshit teams like last time. Plus the rule in union is used differently coz the players actually play in the countries they represent AND it's not as widely used ie. there are not team with 90% grandparent rule players like we have.

Oh and don't mention soccer and their rule either, it's not the same for us.
 

Stevo_G

Juniors
Messages
696
yeah 2008 would be great there is only the olympics that are on that year but the olympics are usually held in september

10 teams for rlwc in aus and nz

aus
nz
png
great britain
frnace
lebanon
russia
fiji
samoa
tonga
 
Messages
14,139
Razor said:
East Coast Tiger said:
t's not as widely used ie. there are not team with 90% grandparent rule players like we have.

Name one League country that does.

I'll give you more than 1 - Scotland and Ireland, their ENC teams were almost entirely grandparent rule players (GRP), with 1 or 2 parent rulers and Italy and Greece in the Ionio Cup similarly.

Also Wales is still majority GRP, while Lebanon still has a significant number, as did Cook Islands in 2000. Nations to employ GRP in the RLWC and more recently include Russia, France, Samoa and Tonga as well.
 
Messages
789
I just think the grandparent rule is stupid when you have players like Kevin McGuiness playing for Ireland or Luke Ricketson!!!

They may use that rule in the RWC but it just wont work in the RLWC, because we will have too many aussies and poms playing for other nations.
 

Razor

Coach
Messages
10,077
East Coast Tiger said:
I'll give you more than 1 - Scotland and Ireland, their ENC teams were almost entirely grandparent rule players (GRP), with 1 or 2 parent rulers and Italy and Greece in the Ionio Cup similarly.

Also Wales is still majority GRP, while Lebanon still has a significant number, as did Cook Islands in 2000. Nations to employ GRP in the RLWC and more recently include Russia, France, Samoa and Tonga as well.

You said 90% grandparent rule which means 16 players from 17.

Ireland has several born in Ireland
Scotland has several born in Scotland.
Lebanon has 7 born in Lebanon.
Wales has the vast majority of their side born in Wales


Greece & Italy didn't play at the WC, but 5 of the Greece side and 4 of the Italian side were born in those countries.
 
Messages
14,139
Razor said:
East Coast Tiger said:
I'll give you more than 1 - Scotland and Ireland, their ENC teams were almost entirely grandparent rule players (GRP), with 1 or 2 parent rulers and Italy and Greece in the Ionio Cup similarly.

Also Wales is still majority GRP, while Lebanon still has a significant number, as did Cook Islands in 2000. Nations to employ GRP in the RLWC and more recently include Russia, France, Samoa and Tonga as well.

You said 90% grandparent rule which means 16 players from 17.

Ireland has several born in Ireland
Scotland has several born in Scotland.
Lebanon has 7 born in Lebanon.
Wales has the vast majority of their side born in Wales


Greece & Italy didn't play at the WC, but 5 of the Greece side and 4 of the Italian side were born in those countries.

Firstly 90% was just an indicative, rough figure (I bet uo had you're calculator out there). But even considering that your figures are wrong.

Name the members of the Scottish and Irish ENC 17 that are born in those countries. I think Ireland had 1 that I know of that's it.

Name this vast majority of Welsh players born in Wales. It was about 7 or 8 at the most v Australia and that's only coz GRPs like Cunningham, Briers, Morgan, Carvell, Busby and Highton were all out injured.

In any case these actual figures are irrelevent the fact remains that these teams shoudln't play GRPs for many reasons and the rule should be phased out or at least restricted by the next RLWC.
 

Razor

Coach
Messages
10,077
East Coast Tiger said:
Firstly 90% was just an indicative, rough figure (I bet uo had you're calculator out there).

Well if you need a calculator to know that 90% of 17 is 16(rounded up) then you better improve your maths skills to that of a 5 year old before starting campaigns.
 
Top