Tri-Series - good or bad decision?

[GBT]

Well, we've got three consecutive tri-series in GB from 2004-6, plus Australia and NZ set to play each other twice Down Under.

As much as I hate to see the end of Ashes Tests, at least for the near future, this format probably gives GB and NZ a better chance at beating the Aussies, something that most fans would agree, is what international League is in need of.

A tri-series also gives the RFL the interrnational programme needed to sell the game on the BBC, fans have something to plan around, as do potential sponsors.

The question is, without a World Cup, where does it leave lesser nations?

 

[salivor]

I think its a good idea to scrap the full scale World Cup for this format. In 2005 South African will be hosting a 20 team emerging nations tournament which is a much better idea. We need the lesser nations consistantly playing each other. I think this new plan is a better mix but let us just take note of how Unions Tri Nations tournament has cheapened international Rugby Union.

 

[Anonymous]

Maybe it will encourage more regional internationals.

I know it's largely exhibition footy but the World Sevens tournament is still all the go and looks like it will be expanded.

Re the Tri-series.. it sounds like a choice had to be made between that and the Ashes series. Doesnt mean the Ashes is gone forever but I can see how the decision was neccessary.

 

[GBT]

The Ashes are gone until 2007, which just happens to be the year of games centenary in Australia. Surely an excuse for some special extravaganza.

Perhaps this period should also be used for more matches between the lesser nations.

Anyway, it gives the sport some breathing space, some time to plan ahead.

 

[Tigerpete]

Tri Series is a bad idea it would seem if u base your opinion on results but the fact is we need a series like this to help rpmote league and get the poms and kiwis playing more regular intenationals..........how else are they meant to improve????

 

[GBT]

According to Ray French, it's a bad idea.

Are we being told by the Australians, who boast that they have the best-supported, best-marketed and most media conscious rugby league competition in the world, that they:

• Are unable to receive a Great Britain squad?

• Cannot devise an innovative programme for a month's stay?

• Cannot market and fund such a visit?

If they are, then they deserve our contempt and all the competition that the other code is now giving them in their own territory.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_league/3110451.stm

 

[Anonymous]

I think some people are harder to please than others. Today I'm reading that Daniel Anderson is complaining that the tri-series helps GB too much. He also said that the propsosed Anazc test isnt good for NZ - this being despite Kiwis calling for it to happen.
Now some journo Ray French (who imo talks out of his arse) reckons the tri-series being hosted in the UK is in someway a snub to GB Rugby League.
Can't please everyone I guess.

 

[GBT]

Willow, I agree, you can't please everyone. Although Ray French does make some valid points, the fact is, we have reached a stage where the old Tests tours had already been consigned to the scrapheap.

Ray French is no mere journo; being a former Widnes and St Helens player he enjoys a lot of respect amongst the Rugby League community - unlike some ex-players who continiously talk the game down - mind you, his commentating for the Beeb leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[Anonymous]

My apologies to Ray French for referring him as being 'some journo'.
But imo, he is missing the point.
The old Test tours hit the wall some time ago. The reason being that the gulf between Australia and daylight just keeps widening.
Promoting international RL in GB is the way to go. Once the fans come out and see that international League is back, the Ashes series will return... in a big way.

 

[GBT]

I agree with the new structure. But Ray French does have a point when he states that fans are growing up in Oz and NZ without any idea of what it's like to watch a touring side.

Test football hit a wall when Super League came about. It will be hard to bring it back now that we play in the summer. A Lions tour downunder would require a change in opinion within the ARL regarding the end of the Australian season, which would have to extend beyond the GF and into your cricket season.

 

[CanadianSteve]

What is the rationale for only holding the Tri series in GB, instead of rotating it to Aus and NZ?

 

[Anonymous]

What is the rationale for only holding the Tri series in GB, instead of rotating it to Aus and NZ?

I'd say its to do with being cost effective.

Also, I'm only guessing but GB needs the boost and after being shafted by Kangaroo tour (cancelled after Sept 11th), it was time for a payback.

 

[CanadianSteve]

What is the rationale for only holding the Tri series in GB, instead of rotating it to Aus and NZ?

I'd say its to do with being cost effective.

Also, I'm only guessing but GB needs the boost and after being shafted by Kangaroo tour (cancelled after Sept 11th), it was time for a payback.

So why not give GB the first one, but then put the next in Aus? Are they afraid Aussie fans wouldn't support it?

 

[Anonymous]

What is the rationale for only holding the Tri series in GB, instead of rotating it to Aus and NZ?

I'd say its to do with being cost effective.

Also, I'm only guessing but GB needs the boost and after being shafted by Kangaroo tour (cancelled after Sept 11th), it was time for a payback.

So why not give GB the first one, but then put the next in Aus? Are they afraid Aussie fans wouldn't support it?

I doubt it very much. Thats something that Ray French inferred and something I strongly disgaree with. The crowd figures to the most recent internationals simply don't support such negative sentiment.

Read what I said again. IMO. it's more to do with being cost effective as well as being a boost to the game in the UK.
Any venture like this looks very closely at the bottom line. It would be difficult to have teams flying around the world and still remain within budget. It would also complicate sponsorship deals.

I know there was a World Cup or two that had global venues but that was before the Super League war and the game was wealthier.

I'm sure if the tri-series was to be played in the antipodes, it would be successful. But there would an outcry (and rightly so) in the UK.

 

[GBT]

Maybe there would be an outcry from British Administrators, but I think many fans would support at least one series being played either in New Zealand or Australia.

The NZRL's Selwyn Pearson has idea's which differ from his British and Australian counterparts and I can understand his concerns. Why should GB stage three consecutive Tri-Series? Maybe twice in Britain and the other in New Zealand would give the competition more balance. New Zealanders would also be watching most of their international rugby league televised from Britain at 7am on Sunday mornings.

According to Pearson only the World Sevens and the first two Tri-Series were definite. Most agreements had been made in principle, and he needed to consult the NZRL directors and Kiwis coach Daniel Anderson. Staging it three times in GB is risking stagnation, by changing the venue - even if it were on the third year - would stimulate the competition and play fair to Southern Hemisphere fans.

What sort of format they choose is yet unkown. In 1999 the three countries played each other just once, with the top two playing the final. An alternative would be to see each side face each other twice. There are differing opinions as to which would be the suitable format from a logistical point of view and which would give us the best chance of a more evenly contested series.

 

[dimitri]

great for aus, nz and gb

shit for other nations

 

[Stevo_G]

yeah tri nations should be good but it sucks that the tri series are only gonna be played in the u,k they should pf rotated the matches between the 3 nations
Well hopefully in the u.k for the tri series they hold some matches outside heartland area

any news that the aus will host a world cup in 2007

 

[ParraEelsNRL]

any international footy is better than none.

we need more games in australia, new zealand and england.

so it should be a small tour for the other 2 nations each yr,but not in england for 3 yrs thats silly.

we only play a couple of games at the end of each yr if where lucky.

why cant we have a squad of 40 players,1 group plays in the tri series and the other players are made up to travel or play at home against lesser nations to help them out and give them some competition.

im sure PNG or russia would like to play against a second string kangaroo team.maybe we could call them the WALLABEES :lol: (ONLY JOKING)

but we need a team of up n commers to play these teams so they get better,at the end of the day we want these teams to be able to compete with the 3 big teams.with no games against the big three,how are they ever going to improve?

if you put a png side against an aussie side in newcastle or townsville im sure it would sellout.

 

[dimitri]

im sure PNG or russia would like to play against a second string kangaroo team.maybe we could call them the WALLABEES (ONLY JOKING)

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[hgfds]

Someone in oz has to realize that the intrenational game is the way forward ,it shouldnt be too hard to organize a mar-apr tour of regional oz by russia,usa,or png.there is no need for them to play oz the matches can be arranged to reflect there level of development [look at the russian tour of nz next year].This would protect league from the union afl plague and would be a cheap development exercise.No worries for the nth hemispere nations they have enough international tournaments oz and the pacific seems to be the only places with problems.