ayatollah_murdoch
Juniors
- Messages
- 565
All Blacks great Michael Jones says rugby union losing 'hearts and minds' to league
His comments came just before the Moana Pasifika Super Rugby team said it would fold unless new investors came in.
That's what i love about Rugby Union folk, Arrogance and a reluctance to look at facts, that Area apparently are all Union Nuts and NOT turning to Rugby League because they prefer it, but because they feel abandoned, utter bollox, keep thinking you rule the world guys, maybe go back to banning people again to help.
The Aus government is about to give Fijiian, Tongan and Samoa Rugby Union 150 million of Aus tax payers dollars.
If NZ best players go to league it would at least make Bledisloe games competitive.
Tana Umaga is a Leaguie at heart. Was on contract with Newcastle but got homesick, then rugby went "professional" (read - decided to pay tax).That's what i love about Rugby Union folk, Arrogance and a reluctance to look at facts, that Area apparently are all Union Nuts and NOT turning to Rugby League because they prefer it, but because they feel abandoned, utter bollox, keep thinking you rule the world guys, maybe go back to banning people again to help.
Well we are giving png 600m for rugby league so 3 countries getting 150m combined for union seems undersThe Aus government is about to give Fijiian, Tongan and Samoa Rugby Union 150 million of Aus tax payers dollars.
You can't make this stuff up.
The GDP of PNG is more than 3 times the GDP of Tonga, Samoa and Fiji combined.Well we are giving png 600m for rugby league so 3 countries getting 150m combined for union seems unders
The GDP of PNG is more than 3 times the GDP of Tonga, Samoa and Fiji combined.
If we're talking investment, PNG is easily the obvious choice. Particularly given their natural resources.
I'll give benefit of the doubt on this one, there's a few issues with looking at it like that
A) gdp and aid would, if anything, be negatively correlated. Otherwise we'd just give the us money (outside of treasuries which you could argue is aid in disguise)
B) even if it weren't, 600 is 4 x 150 so that seems fine on your gdp calc (i see it as >4 times)
C) our foreign spending isn't an investment other than a social one, so that's the wrong lens to put on as we don't get a financial return. You can argue that's what you mean but then it discredits using gdp even further.
D) being resource rich and still higher poverty suggests investment outside of true infrastructure is pretty pointless
E) png was already our biggest recipient of funding pre nrl. So it's unlikely to move the dial from a strategic point of view in a conflict.
