Samoa and Tonga look for defections from Kiwis

[roughyedspud]

It sound slike NZRL will not support the players swapping countries:



From NZHerald

the NZRL can go and f**k themselves...they opened the f**king box when they stole moimoi & tuiaki from tonga...

i'd wholeheartedly support any 'NZ' player who wanted to switch to a island nation....it could actually be good for NZ rugby league because atleast the ones that are left WANT to play for NZ....

 

[roopy]

and get smashed even more so by the media.

.

When do we get smashed by the media?

I keep hearing how having strong sides will be decried by the media.

Peter Fitzsimmons will probably have a go at us over it, but if it wasn't that, he would be having a go at us over how little male bonding our code has or something.

The league following public will laugh at a tournament with poor quality teams and really get behind a tournament with passionate teams playing quality football.

 

[kiwileaguefan]

the NZRL can go and f**k themselves...they opened the f**king box when they stole moimoi & tuiaki from tonga...

i'd wholeheartedly support any 'NZ' player who wanted to switch to a island nation....it could actually be good for NZ rugby league because atleast the ones that are left WANT to play for NZ....

Mate it just proves how pathetic our game is here in NZ. The game is in a wisker of totally falling over with the way its run, the massive debt they are in and the Auckland vs the rest of the districts. I really do see something bad happening in the near fututre which will kill the game out side Auckland.

 

[girvie]

I'd like to see Moimoi and Tuiaki play for Tonga in the World Cup. They both helped Tonga qualify.

It's unfortunate that they've played for NZ in the meantime, but at least that wasn't in the process for helping NZ qualify for the same tournament.

 

[deluded pom?]

Well I think I speak for everyone here saying that I have no confidence in the RLIF. Especially the commitee. I think its the structure of the commitee is the base of the problem. There is clearly a power balance in favour of Australia and then Great Britan follwed by NZ.

Right there is the problem in my eyes. I think if we had representatives from some playing nations, Australia, NZ, England, France, Tonga, Wales, Fiji, PNG, Scotland, Ireland, Samoa and Lebanon and allow them votes in a way that the United Nations vote on their leader and vote on issues. This way the major nations still have the most power but not absolute power. Here is what I mean, a democracy;
Australia - 350 votes
England - 300 votes
NZ - 270 votes
France - 190 votes
PNG - 190 votes
Tonga - 150 Votes
Wales - 150 Votes
Fiji - 70 votes
Scotland - 80 Votes
Ireland - 100 Votes
Lebanon - 100 Votes
Samoa - 120 Votes
(obviously tweeking is required)
Thats 2070 votes in total, and with this system, it would guarentee that everyone has a voice to be heard. Everyone could decide whether or not they want Colin Love as chairman, everyone could decide what the best policy should be reguarding representative eligability, etc.

Thoughts? (I relly like the idea)

I can understand your reasoning TEZZA but can't see where you get your logic regarding the ratio of votes from. Why do Australia get more votes than England? Why do Fiji get less votes than Scotland? One thing your idea isn't is a democracy.

 

[mark2]

how dare australia pick australians in their team!

tried not to bite but couldnt help myself. australia have never stolen players from any other country.

Out of interest how is Hunt an Australian?

 

[cumberlandsashes81]

Out of interest how is Hunt an Australian?

Well, he's lived in Australia since he was 11 and I think he's has played all his football here? I have no idea if he's a citizen or not - but he would clearly qualify to become one.

Interestingly, he qualifies for NZ (where he was born), Australia (Residency), Cook Islands and Samoa (Parents).

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Out of interest how is Hunt an Australian?

No, first you have to explain how all those players you mentioned are NOT Australian. Preferably to their faces.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

I can understand your reasoning TEZZA but can't see where you get your logic regarding the ratio of votes from. Why do Australia get more votes than England? Why do Fiji get less votes than Scotland? One thing your idea isn't is a democracy.

All nations other then Aus, England and NZ i basically just guessed. The fact is that Australia are the most powerful and most sucessful Rugby League nation in the world. We produce the most juniors and have the strongest competition in the world. England being second. It is also why I put in brackets "(obviously tweeking is required)".

 

[Redsfan]

Hunt, Civinoceva

These two I know for sure grew up in Australia, and learned their trade here.

Civonoceva's dad played club RU in Brisbane for years, ffs.

 

[nadera78]

All nations other then Aus, England and NZ i basically just guessed. The fact is that Australia are the most powerful and most sucessful Rugby League nation in the world. We produce the most juniors and have the strongest competition in the world. England being second. It is also why I put in brackets "(obviously tweeking is required)".

That's like saying Brazil should have more votes than anyone else in FIFA meetings. It would completely defeat the purpose of having a delegate from each nation, and just reinforces the 'Test' match crap from the ARL. Either you are an internationally recognised Rugby League playing nation, or your not. None of these grading crap. One member, one vote!

If you want to suggest that the NRL and ESL have one member each and one vote each as well, then that's something we can debate. They are, after all, the only pro comps in the world and provide a living for our players, and the basis for international competition to take place. So I can see a bit of logic in that one. Other than that it should be simply a case of a country having a recognisable domestic comp, and a national rep team. Then they can become a member of the RLIF and have a vote.

 

[roughyedspud]

1 nation 1 vote.......



why should australia,england or NZ vote be more meaning than fiji,ireland,cook islands,usa etc...??

the reason why our international game is in the state it is,is because the ARL,RFL & NZRL have lorded it over everyone else..they think of number one first before looking at the bigger picture..

 

[screeny]

You lads are nuts! How on earth can you back the idea of allowing small countries to have similar statutory rights to the powers who generate ALL the money??!!! I'm all for democratic principles but pragmatically and realistically the big nations have to decide what goes on.

Smaller nations should have to work towards a stringent set of criteria that allow them to have some say in voting, when they become full members, but just like the UN England, France, Australia and NZ should have what amounts to a veto.

 

[roughyedspud]

then nothing would change would it...



and.... the nrl & super league might generate all the money but the ARL gives bugger all to the RLIF ,the RFL bankrolls the RLEF, so we do our bit and thats reflected in the growth of the sport in europe, conversely the ARL's attitude towards international RL is holding back the pacific nations..

why would you want the "big guys" to have a veto? would you want australia to veto a pacific cup because they don't want a island nation to play in the 4 nations so they can snaffle players like meteo...or france veto the pacific or euro cup because they want to be permanently involved in the 4 nations??

if you have veto's you might aswell not have the vote in the first place

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Maybe we should allow the RLs to buy votes. Every country that's a member gets one and then they can buy aditional votes for $1mil each. Okay, maybe not realistic and probably not a good idea in the long run but it would be nice if it meant cash for the RLIF.

I also don't think it's realistic to give smaller countries equal power in the RLIF. The ARL and RFL might not be great but surely they are the best we have. Look at how poorly run the NZRL and French RL is and they are considered the next biggest. I don't really have a major problem with the power balance in the RLIF, I just wish the NRL was more concerned about the international game. If they were we'd be in a much stronger position. That's where the real money and power is.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

That's like saying Brazil should have more votes than anyone else in FIFA meetings. It would completely defeat the purpose of having a delegate from each nation, and just reinforces the 'Test' match crap from the ARL. Either you are an internationally recognised Rugby League playing nation, or your not. None of these grading crap. One member, one vote!

Compare the Brazilian Liga to the FA Premier League. The stantdard, the exposure and the money generated is substantially bigger.

The NRL and Super League have substantially bigger markets and more players, sponsors, etc to cater for.

One nation, one vote? Ok, what would happen if say the RLIF magically get $12 billion dollars. What could a country like Samoa do with $1 billion dollars when their market is at least 50 times smaller then Australia and England.

The big 3 in my system (Aus, NZ and Eng) have almost half the votes and rightly so. The international scene is fairly weak and thats in the biggest markets of Australia and England. So why not put the money where the biggest market is. But with every other nation combined having more votes then the big 3 combined, expandtion is almost guarenteed. For example, if it only takes 430 votes to pass a request for a Pacific Nations Cup, then if Tonga, PNG, Samoa and Fiji all want it and vote yes, it will happen. But if say there is a motion presented to expand the Tri Nations to allow the Pacific Cup winner in and it only requires 700 votes to pass, then Australia, NZ and England combined could not stop it.

The way I set up the votes is so that no one has absolute power and democracy is still maintained and also leaves the major nations with the most power so that the blood life of Rugby League (Australia and England) will still have the loudest voice as they speak for the most players, coaches, staff and the most fans.

 

[roughyedspud]

One nation, one vote? Ok, what would happen if say the RLIF magically get $12 billion dollars. What could a country like Samoa do with $1 billion dollars when their market is at least 50 times smaller then Australia and England.

who said anything about voting for cash??

i'm talking about voting on tournaments & schedules......

if the RLIF magically became wealthy then any money allocated to a country like samoa should be decided by a independant RLIF panel not the ARL who think,right if we give you money whats in it for us?.....

 

[nadera78]

Compare the Brazilian Liga to the FA Premier League. The stantdard, the exposure and the money generated is substantially bigger.

The NRL and Super League have substantially bigger markets and more players, sponsors, etc to cater for.

One nation, one vote? Ok, what would happen if say the RLIF magically get $12 billion dollars. What could a country like Samoa do with $1 billion dollars when their market is at least 50 times smaller then Australia and England.

The big 3 in my system (Aus, NZ and Eng) have almost half the votes and rightly so. The international scene is fairly weak and thats in the biggest markets of Australia and England. So why not put the money where the biggest market is. But with every other nation combined having more votes then the big 3 combined, expandtion is almost guarenteed. For example, if it only takes 430 votes to pass a request for a Pacific Nations Cup, then if Tonga, PNG, Samoa and Fiji all want it and vote yes, it will happen. But if say there is a motion presented to expand the Tri Nations to allow the Pacific Cup winner in and it only requires 700 votes to pass, then Australia, NZ and England combined could not stop it.

The way I set up the votes is so that no one has absolute power and democracy is still maintained and also leaves the major nations with the most power so that the blood life of Rugby League (Australia and England) will still have the loudest voice as they speak for the most players, coaches, staff and the most fans.

What has distribution of grants got to do with anything? We're talking about an international governing body for RL. Each and every member must be treated equally, otherwise we'll get nowhere. Other small sports like ice hockey manage to have just such a system in place. Your system would see the big bthree maintain their grip on the RLIF.

Giving the NRL and ESL one vote each is enough recognition of the hugely important role they play in our game, as i said before, we'd be lost without those pro competitions. But that should be enough, all other members get one rep and one vote.

The RLIF must then appoint full-time staff, and it would be up to them to run the organisation, organise development initiatives, generate income (through the major events like world cup, euro cup, pacific cup, quad nations,) and allocate grant funding to member nations.

 

[roughyedspud]

give the NRL & ESL f**k all votes,the ARL & RFL are the governing bodies....i'm sure you ment that mate..


back to the 1 nation 1 vote thing that some people somehow have an issue with..

lets keep this simple,whats wrong with the top 14 nations, australia down to the USA,all sat round a table voting on proposals for such tournaments like a pacific cup, all those in favour say yes, all those not in favour say no.....

 

[nadera78]

give the NRL & ESL f**k all votes,the ARL & RFL are the governing bodies....i'm sure you ment that mate..


back to the 1 nation 1 vote thing that some people somehow have an issue with..

lets keep this simple,whats wrong with the top 14 nations, australia down to the USA,all sat round a table voting on proposals for such tournaments like a pacific cup, all those in favour say yes, all those not in favour say no.....

Actually, I'd give nrl and esl votes in addition to rfl and arl. Two reason; first we need to keep the clubs onside, play a little bit of politics with them. Give them a seat and a vote and then they can't accuse the feds of pushing through this that and the other, because they would have been part of the discussion. And it would only be two votes out of twenty-odd, so the smaller nations can keep them in check.

They would be the only exceptions though, keep everything else strictly one member one vote. And then get professionals in to organise things. The RLIF council would meet very occasionaly to set goals and agendas, then sit back and let the pros get on with it.