What's new
By:
Advanced search…
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Why do we have the world cup?

clarency

clarency

Juniors
Messages
1,217
I'm a big fan of international rugby league, don't get me wrong. Alot of my friends favour the domestic competition and I find myself having to defend rugby leagues status as a legitimate international game.

However, I don't see this working.

Rugby comps worldwide:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rugby_union_competitions

Soccer comps worldwide:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_association_football_competitions

Rugby league well, they didn't get a list. I suppose from a professional standpoint there really is only 2 (NRL, ESL). How could it even be considered, to be able to host a competitive world cup where there are only 5 (3 of which have only one team) countries that participate in the sport professionally.

Of course this would all be justified if money was involved but with the concerns over whether the event will make a profit or not, that doesn't appear to be the case.

They aren't stupid though. Which is why we have such a different format in our World Cup. The weaker teams play the weaker teams while the professional nations are in the super groups. It's not enough. Beyond the top 2 possibly 3 teams there really is 0% hope of any team winning, and yes while other international comps have teams that are next to no chance it is nowhere near this bad.

I don't think international rugby league has reached a level of maturity that warrants a World Cup. Of course we should have international tournaments and so on, but I think this World Cup is rushing things a bit. Surely they can think of something more appropriate to our situation?
 
P

Pablo-13

Juniors
Messages
42
clarency said:
Rugby league well, they didn't get a list.

Of course this would all be justified if money was involved but with the concerns over whether the event will make a profit or not, that doesn't appear to be the case.

I don't think international rugby league has reached a level of maturity that warrants a World Cup. Of course we should have international tournaments and so on, but I think this World Cup is rushing things a bit. Surely they can think of something more appropriate to our situation?
Click to expand...

I know you're framing your argument but feel the need to say: The lack of a list is not a judgement on RL. Wikipedia is comprised of user contributions. If nobody's got round to making a rugby league list, start one.

I think any competition's existence is justified if people want to play it. This is a sport after all. Making money out of it is a nice extra. (And extremely useful for the game's development.)
 
Last edited:
W

Wilson1

Juniors
Messages
497
This has been asked too many times and there are many very simple reasons.

- It is a celebration of the sport.
- Gives exposure to lower teams (even if they are not playing the top ones).
- Gives every team something to work for whether that be winning the cup or just trying to qualify for it and win some games.
- Generates money for the RLIF.
- Generates interest in rugby league.

I think that Wikipedia articles are okay to use as sources but your reasoning that we should not have a world cup because we do not have a particular Wikipedia article is just laughable. There is no rugby union articles like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_in_rugby_league should they just give up their world cup too?
 
R

roopy

Referee
Messages
27,980
The fact that as many as 80 or so percent of players in the last world cup were full time professional players proves we can put together a quality tournament.
Our 28 professional clubs cover 5 countries, but all teams have many, many players from other countries as well.

In an ideal world we will be able to have 100% full time pro players in the WC in the near future.

Other sports are bigger, but we have somewhere over 600 pro players, and that's enough.
 
clarency

clarency

Juniors
Messages
1,217
I know how wiki works and asserting that my argument revolves around the reliance of wiki is nothing more than a strawman. It is based on the lack of professional domestic rugby league competitions world wide.

Pablo - I agree somewhat. I don't see the justification in having a World Cup when (as I said earlier) we only have 2 professional competitions. If other nations truely wanted it I'd expect more professional comps, yet they aren't there.

Wilson - In a nut shell
1/ there's many ways to support the sport.
2/Again... variety of ways to do this... other than having then destroyed (or at least the winner of the low teams) by the higher up teams.
3/ Going back to my previous point... I'd like to see the international game at a state where more than 3 teams had a decent chance, and many more had somewhat of a chance. In the perfect world maybe but I do place this firmly on the lack of pro comps around the world.
4,5/ Money is barely there though that is changing, I'll admit that. Sport interest however it seems we are preaching to the choir. Games are all played in existing RL areas, it's too risky financially going to new areas to promote it elsewhere.

roopy - kinda grabbing at straws. I have a problem with people playing for countries they don't live in. I'll also point out that this modified WC format proves that the teams are not competitive enough to provide quality matches and must tampered with to make it so. It is a poor attempt at hiding the fact that the lower teams have no chance. It does however give them some pride in being able to win against teams that are on their level.

Don't take me as one of those *rs*holes who argues that SOO beats the WC etc etc. I've always loved international rugby league and can't wait for the WC. The only difference between you and I is that I've accepted that the RLWC, frankly, isn't that good of a product.
 
W

Wilson1

Juniors
Messages
497
roopy said:
The fact that as many as 80 or so percent of players in the last world cup were full time professional players proves we can put together a quality tournament.
Our 28 professional clubs cover 5 countries, but all teams have many, many players from other countries as well.

In an ideal world we will be able to have 100% full time pro players in the WC in the near future.

Other sports are bigger, but we have somewhere over 600 pro players, and that's enough.
Click to expand...

It should be remembered that not every player at the football world cup was professional. In the New Zealand team we had several amateurs.

clarency said:
I know how wiki works and asserting that my argument revolves around the reliance of wiki is nothing more than a strawman. It is based on the lack of professional domestic rugby league competitions world wide.

Pablo - I agree somewhat. I don't see the justification in having a World Cup when (as I said earlier) we only have 2 professional competitions. If other nations truely wanted it I'd expect more professional comps, yet they aren't there.

Wilson - In a nut shell
1/ there's many ways to support the sport.
2/Again... variety of ways to do this... other than having then destroyed (or at least the winner of the low teams) by the higher up teams.
3/ Going back to my previous point... I'd like to see the international game at a state where more than 3 teams had a decent chance, and many more had somewhat of a chance. In the perfect world maybe but I do place this firmly on the lack of pro comps around the world.
4,5/ Money is barely there though that is changing, I'll admit that. Sport interest however it seems we are preaching to the choir. Games are all played in existing RL areas, it's too risky financially going to new areas to promote it elsewhere.

roopy - kinda grabbing at straws. I have a problem with people playing for countries they don't live in. I'll also point out that this modified WC format proves that the teams are not competitive enough to provide quality matches and must tampered with to make it so. It is a poor attempt at hiding the fact that the lower teams have no chance. It does however give them some pride in being able to win against teams that are on their level.

Don't take me as one of those *rs*holes who argues that SOO beats the WC etc etc. I've always loved international rugby league and can't wait for the WC. The only difference between you and I is that I've accepted that the RLWC, frankly, isn't that good of a product.
Click to expand...

Sports which are far bigger and far smaller than all have world cups. Why shouldn't we? There is no way to celebrate a sport like a world cup. There is no other occasion like it.

If you love the world cup why don't you want it to continue? No one is pretending that international league is super competitive but I think it is a good product because in the last world cup I enjoyed every game that I saw.

You say that you still like international rugby league. If that is so, then what do you think should be done instead?
 
R

roopy

Referee
Messages
27,980
clarency said:
roopy - kinda grabbing at straws. I have a problem with people playing for countries they don't live in. .
Click to expand...
You must have a huge problem with the soccer WC then. I think Australia had 2 or 3 local based players, and many countries would have had less than 50% local based players. Meanwhile, australian born players have played for Italy, Croatia and Serbia in recent times, and a few have come close to playing for England.

I haven't seen the figures for recent Union WC, but the one held in Australia they published figures and said if all players were only able to play for their birth countries there would have been 3 teams of kiwis and two each of Australians, South Africans and poms.

In the cricket WC we had aussies playing for Ireland etc, and the poms are made up of the united nations.
 
clarency

clarency

Juniors
Messages
1,217
Wilson - I wouldn't expect 100% of players to be professional, however I would not compare the soccer WC to RLWC. There would be a few amateurs in some of the lower teams and perhaps even more at the very bottom, but that's hardly the case in RL. Second-tier players enter the line-up after the top 3, dropping heavily a few squads later with the lower teams having (if they're lucky) 1 or 2 players from NRL or ESL. Stopping it now would be a bad look, I argue that it was premature to introduce a world wide WC considering the lack of talent. It was moderately successful till about 95 and then it lost it.

Every international fan says that. "I enjoy the game I saw, and that's the main". It may be but I'm quite sure that if it were competitive there would be many more (RL fans or not) who would enjoy the WC and would do far better at promoting the game.

YANTO - You make a good point. While don't have a problem with smaller sports having a world cup, but for RL personally I think there is/was more potential for it than what we have at the moment. I believe that holding of expanding the RLWC (which, with 4 teams is hardly a WC at all... 4 nations?) until other pro comps developed in other areas around the globe to increase the national teams' skills to increase competitiveness to increase the value and overall enjoyment the viewer will get.

roopy-DP - I should clarify. Australian soccer players have players who are born here, who play amateur soccer here, to then go overseas to develop their own career and whatnot.

I'm referring to RL players to who were born here, played here, and then represent a completely different country that they've never lived in before. This is of course due to the loose rules put forward by the RLIF, which is a problem raised many, many times on these forums.

perhaps "I have a problem with people playing for countries they've never lived in" would have been more appropriate.

Eyed - Can't change it now... Needs to stay as it is. WC is not an abysmal failure, and if things go well it will get better in the future. I simply think if international RL had gone a different path it may have made a higher standard RLWC quicker than it will as we are going now.
 
VictoryFC

VictoryFC

Bench
Messages
3,786
M

manoj p

Juniors
Messages
744
Stupid topic really.

Reasons why it is relevant:-

1. 2nd oldest professional world cup in sport (FIFA is first in 1930).
2. First played for in 1954; third of a century prior to union's first wc.
3. First played for in France.
4. Highest average attendance just shy of 35,000.
5. The fact so many great players have competed in it (as per soccer's, contrast to union's).
6. The fact it gives rugby league national teams the opportunity to represent on a closer to neutral playing surface (contrast Anzac setups).
7. The quality of Finals - in 1954, 1972 and 2008 as just three examples.

etc. etc.

Learn something about the tournament before criticising a 57 year old institution.
 
1 Eyed TEZZA

1 Eyed TEZZA

Coach
Messages
12,420
manoj p said:
Stupid topic really.

Reasons why it is relevant:-

1. 2nd oldest professional world cup in sport (FIFA is first in 1930).
2. First played for in 1954; third of a century prior to union's first wc.
3. First played for in France.
4. Highest average attendance just shy of 35,000.
5. The fact so many great players have competed in it (as per soccer's, contrast to union's).
6. The fact it gives rugby league national teams the opportunity to represent on a closer to neutral playing surface (contrast Anzac setups).
7. The quality of Finals - in 1954, 1972 and 2008 as just three examples.

etc. etc.

Learn something about the tournament before criticising a 57 year old institution.
Click to expand...

:lol: Quality because Australia didn't win?
 
M

manoj p

Juniors
Messages
744
1954 - in my view the best ever final

1972 - extra-time

2008 - ten tries

All great games in their own right...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top