International RL ... why it's not taken seriously
-
- Posts: 991
- Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 2:05 pm
International RL ... why it's not taken seriously
How can fans take international rugby league seriously when it appears that some players don't. The way that players switch their national allegiances really gets on my nerves ... for example tonight you have Tony Williams (Tonga) and Akuila Uate (Fiji) now playing for Australia.
Other examples such as Toni Carroll (New Zealand & Australia) and Danny Brough (Scotland & England) prove what a joke internationals are when players switch their nation like their club team.
The international game would improve considerably if the likes of Australia were not able to cherry pick players from "lesser" nations.
In my opinion once you've nailed your colours to a country it should remain there not with the country who offers you the best chance of winning a comp.
Once the authorities start treating the international game with respect maybe the fans will too.
Other examples such as Toni Carroll (New Zealand & Australia) and Danny Brough (Scotland & England) prove what a joke internationals are when players switch their nation like their club team.
The international game would improve considerably if the likes of Australia were not able to cherry pick players from "lesser" nations.
In my opinion once you've nailed your colours to a country it should remain there not with the country who offers you the best chance of winning a comp.
Once the authorities start treating the international game with respect maybe the fans will too.
-
- Posts: 991
- Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 2:05 pm
Re: International RL ... why it's not taken seriously
Oh, whilst I'm in the mood for a rant it would also help if the World Cup was treated with respect it deserves and held regularly every 4 years. Not a 4 year, 5 year or 7 year gap ... it's ridiculous the calendar is all over the shop.
Plus let's have test series back rather than the 4 Nations comp, I'd love to see an Ashes series back in the international arena.
Plus let's have test series back rather than the 4 Nations comp, I'd love to see an Ashes series back in the international arena.
- bourbon_rat
- Posts: 548
- Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 1:47 am
- Contact:
Re: International RL ... why it's not taken seriously
If you're watching the Australia - New Zealand match then you'll also see why none aligned viewers won't take it seriously.They are subjected too the inane waffling of the two Sky Muppets - I couldn't wait for halftime & the cross back to Peter Stirling,etc in OZ & an intelligent breakdown of the 1st half
Scrappy & 2nd rate by both teams - Bentham way to easy on tackles
Scrappy & 2nd rate by both teams - Bentham way to easy on tackles
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite
and furthermore always carry a small snake - W C Fields
and furthermore always carry a small snake - W C Fields
-
- Posts: 991
- Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 2:05 pm
Re: International RL ... why it's not taken seriously
Nah, Waldorf & Statler are the reason why the southern hemisphere won't take Super League seriously. Some of the comments that pair come out with really make me cringe, it's clear the NRL is the better comp.
-
- Posts: 991
- Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 2:05 pm
Re: International RL ... why it's not taken seriously
My problem is with players who make themselves available for selection for one country then when a "stronger" nation comes calling they want to switch the nation they represent.
To me it makes a total farce of the honour of playing for your country, if the player thinks they're good enough to play for England, NZ or Australia then they should take their chances on being selected by them not hedge their bets with the likes of Ireland, Tonga or Samoa.
It isn't fair on less experienced nations to have their pool of players cherry picked by the big players of the international arena. We'd see a far more competitive world game if this was prevented from taking place.
The international board should make it law that once you make your debut for a particular country that there's no change of allegiance further down the track.
To me it makes a total farce of the honour of playing for your country, if the player thinks they're good enough to play for England, NZ or Australia then they should take their chances on being selected by them not hedge their bets with the likes of Ireland, Tonga or Samoa.
It isn't fair on less experienced nations to have their pool of players cherry picked by the big players of the international arena. We'd see a far more competitive world game if this was prevented from taking place.
The international board should make it law that once you make your debut for a particular country that there's no change of allegiance further down the track.
-
- Posts: 472
- Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:49 am
Re: International RL ... why it's not taken seriously
The problem is that rugby league is still somehow a fledgling game at this level. The lesser nations need these dual qualified players to help them establish themselves and compete. I've heard plenty about italy's world cup qualifying campaign, all because Anthony Minnichiello is playing for them and these fixtures have had more publicity because of him. If he'd been asked, when he started out, if he would give up any chance of playing for Australia, to play for Italy, there's no way he would have done that. Same goes for Hayne and Uate for Fiji at the world cup and many other examples.
We had world cups well before RU did and have done pretty much nothing to improve the intrenational game since whereas theirs has gone from strength to strength. It's sad but we still need these good young players to play for heritage countries early in their careers to improve the game.
We had world cups well before RU did and have done pretty much nothing to improve the intrenational game since whereas theirs has gone from strength to strength. It's sad but we still need these good young players to play for heritage countries early in their careers to improve the game.
Re: International RL ... why it's not taken seriously
Thought it was very amateurish and embarrassing when Menb At Work was being played after a try was scored, it was like watching the naff attempts of Bradford's americanisation of games circa 1996, what next Hey Macnamara, totaly shocking and cringeworthy :eusa4:
ps
why play a big international game in small stadium owned by a small team, surely the RFL could have used the DW, Galpharm or KC :eusa2:
ps
why play a big international game in small stadium owned by a small team, surely the RFL could have used the DW, Galpharm or KC :eusa2:
-
- Posts: 1120
- Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 12:35 am
Re: International RL ... why it's not taken seriously
Because the HWJ stadium wasn't even remotely full and playing a game with a small crowd in a big stadium dilutes the atmosphere and looks even worse on the box. Playing it on Friday night hasn't helped. I'm predicting an embaressingly empty looking wembley next week for the double header.medlocke wrote:Thought it was very amateurish and embarrassing when Menb At Work was being played after a try was scored, it was like watching the naff attempts of Bradford's americanisation of games circa 1996, what next Hey Macnamara, totaly shocking and cringeworthy :eusa4:
ps
why play a big international game in small stadium owned by a small team, surely the RFL could have used the DW, Galpharm or KC :eusa2:
If I was organising these events, I would have played all the matches as double headers in 30,000ish seater stadiums and done them on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon - crucially up north. Wembley may have a name, a national profile and some cache, but playing in the capital will hit the attendances massively. I'm not going, in part because I need to renew my season ticket, but mainly becuase I can't afford the ticket, travel and grazing on top of everything else.
this week.
Re: International RL ... why it's not taken seriously
The RL are an embarrassment, total shambles from the off. We had national anthems with nobody leading the singing for either nation, the game should have been played down south so that more of the aussie and kiwis working down south could have gone, I would have charged as little as possible to try and fill a ground in London (not wembley). I would have played the England game at HJ and the final in the north and sack Wembley off all together and all ticket prices for all games should be as cheap as possible so that we can fill the grounds for every game and sack the two dickheads who talk bollocks for the length of the game.
Re: International RL ... why it's not taken seriously
I understand ticket sales are good for Wembley - around 30,000+ now.
Lower tiers sold out, having now to open upper sections.
Better for the game if fans support the National side - BBC National News led their Sports Bulletin last night with the Rugby League, ahead of Premier Soccer, England Cricket & yawnion.
How much the negativity played on Sam/Joel we'll never know - but union fans encompass their 2nd rate team/game, unlike RL fans, in general.
Lower tiers sold out, having now to open upper sections.
Better for the game if fans support the National side - BBC National News led their Sports Bulletin last night with the Rugby League, ahead of Premier Soccer, England Cricket & yawnion.
How much the negativity played on Sam/Joel we'll never know - but union fans encompass their 2nd rate team/game, unlike RL fans, in general.