Who will join big 3 for 2011 4N

[Coastbloke]

When the 2010 Four Nations is held in Australia - and possibly NZ - who do you think will join Australia, England and NZ in the tournament...??

I understand that this years Pacific Nations Cup being held at a local oval near you - thanks to RLIF stupidity - will decide who will be there..

Will Fiji capitalise on their form at the RLWC2008 or do you reckon PNG will do the job..

I just can't see Tonga or Samoa making the grade regardless of any NRL or ESL players they manage to hang on to...

I think It'll be PNG...

 

[roopy]

When the 2011 Four Nations is held in Australia - and possibly NZ - who do you think will join Australia, England and NZ in the tournament...??

I understand that this years Pacific Nations Cup being held at a local oval near you - thanks to RLIF stupidity - will decide who will be there..

Will Fiji capitalise on their form at the RLWC2008 or do you reckon PNG will do the job..

I just can't see Tonga or Samoa making the grade regardless of any NRL or ESL players they manage to hang on to...

I think It'll be PNG...

Whichever one of those four wants it the most - which is the way it should be.
On paper, Fiji are probably the least talented, but they wanted it most in the WC and came out on top.
I'd love for Samoa to get serious and win their way through, because i think a serious Samoa could give the big 3 a scare.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

It will come down to which country can get its best players to play. I doubt we'll see Hayne and Sims play for Fiji and it's pretty doubtful that Samoa or Tonga will look anywhere near as strong as they did last year. PNG probably won't have Costigan and Gene is probably finished.

 

[adamkungl]

Regardless of which gets through, none of them have the ability to make a dent in the big 3. I imagine a PI team would give it a good shake though.

 

[Poul]

When the 2011 Four Nations is held in Australia - and possibly NZ

I was under the impression that the 2011 Four Nations would be held in the northern hemisphere along with the 2009 4 nations. I thought that it was the 2010 4 nations that would be held in the southern hemisphere, and which would include the 2009 Pacific Cup winner.

Plaese correct me if I am wrong.

 

[druzik]

I was under the impression that the 2011 Four Nations would be held in the northern hemisphere along with the 2009 4 nations. I thought that it was the 2010 4 nations that would be held in the southern hemisphere, and which would include the 2009 Pacific Cup winner.

Plaese correct me if I am wrong.

4N 2009 is held in England and France involving Australia, New Zealand, England and France
Pacific Nations Cup 2009 is in Australia with the winner going to 2010 4N

4N 2010 is held in Australia and New Zealand(?) involveing Australia, New Zealand Enagland and winner of 2009 Pacific nations
European Nations cup help in Europe winner goes to 2011 4N

4N 2011 is held in UK and France involving Australia, New Zealand, England and winner European nations cup 2010.

2012 is tours and WC qualifiers

2013 is WC.


So what is the problem with all that by the way.

 

[Kurt Angle]

Re: 2011 four nations

If France don't win the euro nations and thus fail to qualify, why would they co-host it?

If it was Ireland or Wales, I'm sure their RL bodies would want to host games instead

 

[druzik]

Re: 2011 four nations

If France don't win the euro nations and thus fail to qualify, why would they co-host it?

If it was Ireland or Wales, I'm sure their RL bodies would want to host games instead

Yes true, got ahead of myself there... by all means if Wales go through then they should get games.

But that is not the problem I was eluding to.

 

[Coastbloke]

I was under the impression that the 2011 Four Nations would be held in the northern hemisphere along with the 2009 4 nations. I thought that it was the 2010 4 nations that would be held in the southern hemisphere, and which would include the 2009 Pacific Cup winner.

Plaese correct me if I am wrong.

You're correct..

 

[marshall stalin]

Soviet Russia will join the other 3 and be number 1 -

 

[bender]

4N 2009 is held in England and France involving Australia, New Zealand, England and France
Pacific Nations Cup 2009 is in Australia with the winner going to 2010 4N

4N 2010 is held in Australia and New Zealand(?) involveing Australia, New Zealand Enagland and winner of 2009 Pacific nations
European Nations cup help in Europe winner goes to 2011 4N

4N 2011 is held in UK and France involving Australia, New Zealand, England and winner European nations cup 2010.

2012 is tours and WC qualifiers

2013 is WC.


So what is the problem with all that by the way.

I am not sure if this is a question, or a shot at someone from earlier or what, but i will have a go at pointing out the problem.

Holding the tri nations so regularly devalues the world cup, and adds to the problem that only the big 3 nations are attractive to players who qualify for other nations and these three are going to attract more and more players.

The world cup should have been the ultimate goal for all international teams. Now, because the main competitors are back together playing again, everyone has forgotten about New Zealands world cup. What we should have had this year is pushed and marketed the kiwis as the world champions (lets not forget, unless i am mistaken by the time of the next world cup they will be the longest reigning kiwi sporting champions in any sport (with the possible exception of Americas cup yachting). that is a huge feat. The kiwis should have capitalised on this by marketing it to the hilt and playing sides like Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, France or even Wales, Scotland, Ireland or England. All sides who, thanks to the world cup could start to build an international reputation. this is the only way that the international game will grow. It would also help the kiwis build the kiwi brand name in New Zealand. THis will do far more than them playing an away test match on ANZAC day. They should (imo) use a bit of old fashioned rivalry, complain about the aussies not resting kiwi players the week before the test and tell them they are cancelling the ANZAC test and playing PNG in Wellington instead.

With Wellington and Christchurch both looking at Possible NRL births and even Hamilton and other areas getting good trial games, The kiwis should be used to build and develop the game of rugby league in these areas.

Likewise, with Australia, why do they need to play England and New Zealand again? It would be far better for them to play PNG or Fiji or Even tonga and Samoa so that these countries can build their reputations after what they did during the world cup. All a tri series will do, is help everybody forget how good the world cup showed us other international sides were.

England also, need to develop the England brand but more importantly the other European sides. It needs to be seen as a good result for them to beat France, Wales and Ireland etc. I think they should play in the European cup for at least a year. Also, what is the point of playing England in the tri series when it means that Wales, Scottish and Irish players cant make it. The tri Series should be Great Britain.

If it were up to me, i would make the following cycle of games.

Year 1 World Cup Year.
Year 2 Touring Years (establishing an alternating pattern)
Year 3 European Cup/Pacific Cup
Year 4 Tri/Quad Nations/World cup Qualifying.

 

[druzik]

I am not sure if this is a question, or a shot at someone from earlier or what, but i will have a go at pointing out the problem.

Holding the tri nations so regularly devalues the world cup, and adds to the problem that only the big 3 nations are attractive to players who qualify for other nations and these three are going to attract more and more players.

The world cup should have been the ultimate goal for all international teams. Now, because the main competitors are back together playing again, everyone has forgotten about New Zealands world cup. What we should have had this year is pushed and marketed the kiwis as the world champions (lets not forget, unless i am mistaken by the time of the next world cup they will be the longest reigning kiwi sporting champions in any sport (with the possible exception of Americas cup yachting). that is a huge feat. The kiwis should have capitalised on this by marketing it to the hilt and playing sides like Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, France or even Wales, Scotland, Ireland or England. All sides who, thanks to the world cup could start to build an international reputation. this is the only way that the international game will grow. It would also help the kiwis build the kiwi brand name in New Zealand. THis will do far more than them playing an away test match on ANZAC day. They should (imo) use a bit of old fashioned rivalry, complain about the aussies not resting kiwi players the week before the test and tell them they are cancelling the ANZAC test and playing PNG in Wellington instead.

With Wellington and Christchurch both looking at Possible NRL births and even Hamilton and other areas getting good trial games, The kiwis should be used to build and develop the game of rugby league in these areas.

Likewise, with Australia, why do they need to play England and New Zealand again? It would be far better for them to play PNG or Fiji or Even tonga and Samoa so that these countries can build their reputations after what they did during the world cup. All a tri series will do, is help everybody forget how good the world cup showed us other international sides were.

England also, need to develop the England brand but more importantly the other European sides. It needs to be seen as a good result for them to beat France, Wales and Ireland etc. I think they should play in the European cup for at least a year. Also, what is the point of playing England in the tri series when it means that Wales, Scottish and Irish players cant make it. The tri Series should be Great Britain.

If it were up to me, i would make the following cycle of games.

Year 1 World Cup Year.
Year 2 Touring Years (establishing an alternating pattern)
Year 3 European Cup/Pacific Cup
Year 4 Tri/Quad Nations/World cup Qualifying.

Bender I have put up my answer in the WC every year thread on what I think needs to be done.

BUT

Its not a stot at anyone per se... just the potential unfairness of the 4N set up. Now the 2010 4N is going to be Australia, NZ England and the pacific cup winner. So france drops out... But lets say that that this years 4N ends up Australia, France, NZ england? Is France still dropping out. Why should they get punished for doing well and reward england for doing bad. I think the 4N positions should not be set in stone. It should be th bottom team that drops out and not a set team.

What if in 2010 say PNG qualify and they do well as well, they come 2nd, and they need to drop out for doing well?

Even though I think the 4N is missing the baot it could be potentially done so much better to benefit the other nations. Potentially we could have in 2011 a 4N that involves say Australia, PNG France Russia for arguments sake, if russia win the Euro nations cup.

Again what the 4N shows is that the "big 3" countries are trying to show that they care about IRL but in realiuty are still having that glass roof there to tease everyone else. In reality we are no better than Rugby Union who have their "top 8 club" and no one else is alowed to play.

 

[Kurt Angle]

To be honest RL has to play to it's commercial realities and that is that only Australia draws a crowd in England and Australians will only watch reasonably competitive games in decent numbers

No other games in international RL make money

Seeing as the RLIF gets a clip from these games to further underwrite its fledgling international program of growth

An ideal program would be worse team drops out with the best replacing it but commercial realities dictatce Australia and England will always be there

NZ is the next best quality competition. 4th spot is about opening up this highest level to aspiring nations

The next best qualitative levels of euro or pacific nations don't make any money