RLWC2007 plus international news

[In-goal]

all this talk of union sickens me

The shire ingnorance of there surport and at times our very own frustrates me no end.

Rugby a 13 a side game
Rugby Union 15 a side amatuer sport

 

[carlnz]

Russia are coming down to NZ early 2004 to play matches, Why dont the RILF spend more money to send teams like Russia, Lebanon, USA and South Africa to Aussie to play NRL teams?? They might get smashed but the more they play the better they are getting. These 4 teams have been proven to put time and effort in to developing the game in there countries.....so why dont they reward them???

 

[Fampa]

Ummm....lack of money maybe?

 

[Bezant]

Ummm....lack of money maybe?

hopefully this will change...most likely slowly...due to the efforts of the RLIF with others assisting them

 

[YANTO]

Bezent wrote..............hopefully this will change...most likely slowly...due to the efforts of the RLIF with others assisting them..................this is the real world Bezent,the governing bodies worldwide are reluctant to put money up for developing countries.

Here in the Netherlands we have had ZERO financial assistance in our efforts.
For the Scotland games both the Scottish and Dutch Federations requested referees from the RFL and the ERLF to take charge of the games.

The reply we got was "Who is paying their costs".
NOT "great another country expanding lets send two top referees over to Holland to give the game a higher profile and help in the development".
NO the first thing was who is going to pay.

In the end the two Scottish International matches cost members of the NNRLB ,PERSONALY, over 1500 pounds to stage.

In a country where League is unknown,assistance could have been provided if the IRLF/RFL/ERLF are serious about expansion.

Forgetting the money side we have had very little help on coaching,not even programmes and/or manuals,no help on administration,no advice on funding, in fact absoloutly NOTHING in 12 months.

I know from other federations they are in the same boat.

The European Federation was launched in January 2003 and since then they seem to have all but dissapeared,the French in turmoil and the RFL at loggerheads with BARLA.

For any new countries looking to develop League in Europe unless you have:-
a) An ex-pat community in Sydney,(ie Greece,Italy)
b) A muli-millionare Russian Casino owner (Russia) or
c) A Lottery winner on the board,(new year wish )
you will strugle along trying your best, knowing that your efforts depend on you ,your board and your enthusiasim.

The IRB fund even their lowest nations to some extent, the Rugby League seemingly fund only the Super League/NRL Aussie,Kiwi and GB, the rest are left to scratch amongst the chickens whilst even Georgia RFU fly with the eagles.

 

[screeny]

Yanto,

I heard that the Euro Fed sent refs to the Med Cup so they aren't really dead...yet! Seems like they're doing something at least.

I think in RL we have to accept that central funding just ain't there.

 

[YANTO]

We have accepted that there is no funding, but given the amount of money generated in the proffessional game if even a 1% levy from all income was put aside for development it would be a start.

There has to be some funding for emerging nations or expansion will never happen on the scale that is benificial to the game as a whole.

Scotland "A" are the one of the most interesting cases.
Every year they pack their bags and head of to tour some remote developing nation to promote the game, and every year they finance this themselves.
Last year their tour to Holland,Italy and Serbia was a great success but apart from the Dutch leg (when we got two refs from the Hull Society to come over) the men in charge of controling the games were actually members of the Scottish party with little knowledge of refereeing at (emerging)International level..
Surly this small problem could have and should have been addressed by the ERLF??
It is these little things that make us look "Unproffesional" in our application of the game to new nations.

 

[Jeffles]

Great points raised there Yanto.

The RLIF has given grants in the past couple of years to Pacific nations, Tonga and Samoa I think. And while money is a problem (there isn't enough for more grants) the issuing of manuals and referees etc is a much cheaper and efficient method of development and they should be looked at.

 

[mono_mal]

the RLIF do what they can with limited finances and resources.
you have to remember Tas Bateiri is the sole employee of the RLIF and works tirelessly to improve our game on an international level.

 

[In-goal]

This is going to be a sore point until the proposed WC goes ahead in Australia which i belive could make the game anything upto around A$8 million if set up right, one must take into account TV revenue gate takings the sponsors and of course merchandise sales.

Sounds a bit pie in the sky but think about the math and it's not far off the mark.

25,000 people at Parra stadium to watch Lebanon v Wales not impossible.

20,000 people at Dairy Farmers to Watch New Zealand v P.N.G pretty good

15,000 people watching England v Ireland in Melbourne you might be surprised.

 

[Kurt Angle]

If a WC occurs, NZ will host their own pool.

You know, I want a WC in Oz, but RL could still be in a lose-lose situation.

Perth Adelaide and Launceston got RUWC games, but seeing as the fake rugby tournament had 20 teams, it allowed for 10 games per pool, + 4 1/4'2, 2 semis and two finals, all up 48 games.

We will have 4 x 6 game pools, + 7 finals. (I can't see the point of 3rd place play off).

At least 7, and likely a semi will go to NZ.

That leaves 19 or 20 games for Australia.

Now if we don't stick games in Perth and Adelaide, they will take it as a big snub by the ARL.

But the only games that will draw crowds will be games involving Australia.

Now if you take the Kangaroos away from RL territory, and not to be seen until the quarter finals, there's gunna be hell to pay.

That said, an RLWC _WILL_ work.

46,000 for Scotland vs Fiji for fake rugby showed a RLWC will work.

It may mean though another backward step for RL in SA and WA.

But simply, we have all the stadiums, we can easily be content filling 20-25k stadiums.

Dairy Farmers, Carrara, Energy Australia, North Power, Parramatta Stadium, WIN, Canberra Stadium.

And bigger games at Lang, Aussie and hopefully we can hold the finals in Telstra.

 

[The Observer]

It looks likely that RLWC will have 8 teams, so NZ won't host their own pool. They may host games involving the Kiwis, but that's it. I could imagine that NSW would get most games in one pool, QLD most games in the other, the Roos taking one pool game north of the border. I like the idea of holding all the pool games at small venues e.g. Townsville, North power, Parra, WIN, Canberra etc.

I'd say there'll be two semis and a final. If the Kiwis make the semis and aren't playing Aus in the semis(i'm sure they'd be kept apart), then hopefully they'd host their own semi. I'd like to see the Kangaroos play the other semi at Suncorp and the final at Homebush.

 

[Kurt Angle]

Hmmm, 8.

For competitiveness and credibility 8 looks good, I said that number back in 2001.

My biggest point was it's no good for a team like PNG to trash other sides by 30 in its pool, then com against England, NZ or Oz in the quarter finals and 'thanks for coming'.

PNG needed a hard hit out against Australia, then play England the next week.

But now, we have at least 2 more nations, i.e Russia and Lebanon that have to be there.

Qualifers would probably be:

Automatic:
Australia, NZ and England.

Then after would probably be the top 4 of the euro nations cup, and 1 from Oceania.

This would be Wales, France, Ireland and Scotland.
+ PNG.

Now this sucks, cuz Scotland or Ireland are going to harvest any grandparent link they can find to make sure they get there, and leaving a more deserving team like Russia out of the cup.

Same can be said of Lebanon who would be more deserving or Samoa and Fiji.

8 teams will make a sizeable profit, but I think at least 12 teams need to be there for the game to grow.

Then you'd ask, 2 pools of 6 + semi's and final, (33 games over 7 weeks).
or 4 pools of 3 with 1/4's, semis and final (19 games over 6 weeks).

 

[The Observer]

Kurt,

I agree with you on the number of teams. The number is based on what the RLIF feel they can afford. I'd like to see the Cup held in 2009, one year later, so that a Centenary of RL celebration can generate the money for an expanded 12 team competition. I could imagine 3 pools of 4
* one in NSW/ACT
* one in QLD/PNG
* one in NZ
Not sure how you would structure the finals though.

Given that it will prob be 8 teams, it is also likely that there will be regional qualifying tournaments. The Mediterranean Cup, Victory Cup and a revived Pacific Cup may all act as qualifiers.

I would imagine that the RFL will send the Lions to represent Great Britain and Ireland (so that is England, Scotland, Wales, Northern ireland and the Republic). I'm guessing that if France get their Super League team in 2006, they may also be allowed to qualify automatically.

So that leaves four spots. I'm guessing that the following would qualify:
Pacific Cup - PNG & Tonga will beat Cook Islands, Fiji, New Caledonia & Samoa. Although the ATSI and Aotearoa Maori may take part, and if so thrash every other team in this pool, I doubt they will be allowed into the Cup IMO they should be allowed in without having to qualify.

Med Cup - Lebanon will beat Morocco, Serbia, France A, Greece, Italy.

Victory Cup - Russia (from USA, Russia, BARLA, France A, NZ Services)

Lebanon and Russia don't have a more inherent right to be there than any other team. Remember, Lebanon use as many GP players as Scotland and Ireland. They'll get there through qualifiers.

About Russia, you can read my posts elsewhere on the International Forum to what stage of development they are at. They have a LONG way to go.

 

[Kurt Angle]

I feel Lebanon and Russia do have more rights.

As much as the smack in the face of credibility Lebanon was in 2000. They have now started a -

Domestic competition ( after only 3 years ago they played it)
A body who has is adding strongly to the international aspect (Med cup, sending a domestic select XIII to Morocco, etc)
A most importantly, had the med cup final shown on Lebanon TV.
There ruling body also makes sure domestic players are amongst the team, ensuring the are striving to be rid of the GP as soon as possible.

Russia has a domestic comp, plays in victory cup and euro cup, has many teams, sends teams to england for the challenge cup.

Scotland has lived 100km from the northern hemispheres RL hotbed for over 100 years.
Still have a very weak domestic comp.
Don't get on TV.
Will play a WC with GP players, suck up all the appearences fees, then disappear until the next WC.

I'd rather the appearances fees go to Russia and Lebanon, who look like they will do much more positive things with it than Scotland ever has or ever will.

Just my opinion

 

[In-goal]

a bit harsh on Scotland, after all scotland students have done more for the game in Europe over the last few years than any governing body in the Southern Hemisphere.

So i take that as a non issue.

I believe 10 or 12 is the right way to go.

The game must move beyond NSW/QLD and the ACT only a twit would see otherwise.

 

[Gobbso]

I seriously hope they consider sending or at least open a qualifying tournament for an Australian Aboriginal team. If the NZ Maori's were eligible and able to compete in the last World Cup, why shouldn't the Australian Aboriginal's be allowed the same respect? Do they feel threatened by such a team? :shock:

 

[In-goal]

I don't agree with having the Moari or the Aboriginal side at the WC, i am all for the people of these cultures embracing our game but when it comes to the WC the are represented buy the country.

 

[The Observer]

Having reflected upon which national teams would be competitive in a full World Cup, I considered how many of them directly draw players from club teams in their country that participate in a full time pro competition.

Aus has the NRL, GB the Super League. NZ has he Warriors, France will have UTC. In the 8 team RLWC, 4 out of 8 teams ie half the teams would draw upon a core of full time professional players and thus would have a chance to win it. This compares favourably to RU, where 9 from 20 national teams could draw upon a core of players that participated in full time Rugby in their country (Aus, NZ, SA, Eng, Wales, Scotland, Ireland, France, Italy). Just under half. % wise, we would have more competitive teams than the RU Cup.

In that case 8 teams would be the way to go - UNLESS we allow entry to the Aboriginal and Maori teams, in which case a 10 team cup could still be quite competitive. The Aborigines and Maori could each draw upon about 50 current or recently full time professional players.

Two pools of five teams would work. One based primarily in NSW/ACT, the other primarily in QLD/PNG/NZ. Like RU, we wouldn't have to shackle pools to a particular state, so games could be taken around when appropriate.

So, with my own seedings in brackets
POOL A: Aus (1), GB (3), Maori (5), Tonga (7), Lebanon (9)
POOL B: NZ (2), France (4), Aborigines (6), PNG (8), Russia (10)

If the Aborigines and Maori made the RLWC, more than half the teams could win it (6/10).

I'm sure the indigenous teams could raise the money to compete. ATSIC would definitely come to the party, as would the NZ Government.

So Gobbso, you made an excellent point!

 

[The Observer]

I don't agree with having the Moari or the Aboriginal side at the WC, i am all for the people of these cultures embracing our game but when it comes to the WC the are represented buy the country.

You must also disagree with the inclusion of the following teams:
England,
Scotland,
Northern Ireland
Wales
Great Britain Lions
Island of Ireland
Great Britain and Ireland Lions
West Indies (when they start playing)

because none of those teams represent countries either. The first four represent parts of countries (like picking NSW or QLD). The last three represent more than one country, like picking an ANZAC team or a Scandinavian team. Perhaps if you were to suggest that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Lions enter the Cup, you might have a case under your argument.

This argument has been done to death though.