WiganWarriorsFans.com

jinkin jimmy posted:
Here we go again.....

When people say they would choose Wigan v Saints over GB v Aus I can only say what a short sighted view that is.

Not short sighted. Just a personal preference that happens to differ from your own.

It is my opinion that having the prefernece of putting club before country is short sighted because ultimately it will affect the club detrimentally as the sport will ultiamtely suffer.

If people can't see that, then they are putting their heads in the sand in my opinion.

Sorry if that offends anyone
I don't think so!!

:doz:

Sports that do not have a strong international side to them ultimately become minority sports and weaker. The opposite is also true. Look at the effect on cricket of the Ashes triumph last year.

We always have been a minority sport and that's actually how I like it. I would never go to a game again if it became as big as football. I prefer the fact that the players are real people and approacheable and that I don't have to travel great distances to watch the games.
BTW I didn't exactly see curling take the country by storm after that Olympic win.

I didn't realise the national curling teams provided a route to international fame and fortune for RL players.

You might be happy with RL living in a vacuum but the fact it is does not. It is a professional game that is threatened by the success of RU (and to lesser extent soccer in Wigan due to latics success).

There are hundreds of kids in Chester RU's minis section and they are not there becuase Chester RU seniors are any good!

If you want to travel short distances to games follow amateur RL but regardless of the international aspects of the game RL is expanding in the UK slowly and you might find Wigan having more than London and Les Cats as "real" away games in future.

If you don't think international success matters you would be mistaken.

I didn't say it didn't matter, I said I'd rather watch Wigan. Are you putting words into people's mouths again?

No, I'll leave that up to you.

So are players. Why do you think jason Robinson and Andy Farrell left? It wasn't just money. JR is now far more famous for scoring Englands try in the world cup final than FOR winning a challenge cup medal for Wigan.

So what. We will NEVER struggle to attract players in our heartland as a result of anything Yawnion does.

Depends what standard of players we attract doesn't it. Play Rugby Union for £150K a year, play RL for £50K a year. It is obvious what will happen.

The atmosphere at the JJB when GB v Austrial is on is as good as any Wigan v Saints match.

But all internationals are not played at the JJB so what is you point?

That internationals generate a great atmosphere. Previous posts implied to me that they were somewhow lesser occasions than Wigan v Saints. Having seen a full house at the JJB for Wigan v Saints and a full house for GB v Australia also at the JJB the atmosphere at both was superb.

Getting one over on the Aussies ought to be ultimate goal of Rugby League in this country. If we give up and throw in the towel the standard of the game will continue drop. And it has dropped over the years IMO as although players my be fitter that does not automatically mean they are better.

Well firstly, this may come as a surprise but I'm actually more worried about tonight than the bloody Aussies.

Why change the subject? This thread is about international RL following on from Clarkes resignation statememnt. It is a seperate subject top Wigan's current plight.

As to tonight were you expecting us to go and win there pre-season? A loss would hardly be a surprise if we had won all our previous matches so I am less concerned about the result but more how the team plays.

Second, we have not given up as far as I can tell. Third, If standards are dropping as you believe despite us playing more internationals now than ever before it would appear to prove that the more we play, the worse we get.

If you really beleive that simplisitic logic there is no hope for you! There are lots reasons why the standard of play is down. If you want to discuss that, fine, but to suggest there is link between playing more internationals and poorer standards is silly, in my opinion of course.

Dave

Dave,

You may have the patience - or time - to type ad nauseam but unfortunately I don't. I just thought that for once I would diseminate one of your posts in the way that you indefatigueably do to others to show you how supercillious, condescending and aloof it appears.

There is never any point debating or responding to your posts in any other than the most congratulatory tones because to do otherwise always prompts your tactic of swamping people in text and it is rather tiresome to put it midly.

Ultimately, for most people, it comes down to finances - ideally I'd go to all Wigan games and all GB/England games, home and abroad, but for both time and money reasons, I can't.

If I choose a Wigan season ticket over a tri-nations series, then that's my choice - I don't feel obliged to prop up the international game at the expense of my club.

GeoffN posted:
Ultimately, for most people, it comes down to finances - ideally I'd go to all Wigan games and all GB/England games, home and abroad, but for both time and money reasons, I can't.

If I choose a Wigan season ticket over a tri-nations series, then that's my choice - I don't feel obliged to prop up the international game at the expense of my club.

Cost is certainly a factor but that is just one aspect of it.

If the RFL want to try and charge £30 & £40 a seat and risk poor attendance that is just another part of the problem with the organistion of the international game.

It isn't in my opinion a reason to put club before country in the way Clarke means.

Clarke is on about the organisation of the game supporting Internationals. He wants a stronger GB which means compromises in the league program and I agree with him because I think it would be good for the game nationally not just internationally.

Dave

jinkin jimmy posted:
Dave,

You may have the patience - or time - to type ad nauseam but unfortunately I don't. I just thought that for once I would diseminate one of your posts in the way that you indefatigueably do to others to show you how supercillious, condescending and aloof it appears.

Breaking posts up to answer the points made is considered good nettiquet and has been since the days of use Usenet.

Not quoting a reply or quoting the whole thing then tacking your reply at the bottom forcing people to scroll down to find what you have added is considered the opposite.

So I didn't consider the fact you did it supercillious, condescending and aloof as you put it. Just good practice.

(If you consider the above patronising, you may on this occiasion be right.)

There is never any point debating or responding to your posts in any other than the most congratulatory tones because to do otherwise always prompts your tactic of swamping people in text and it is rather tiresome to put it midly.

Don't bother to reply then. No one forces you to.

Dave

I have already said I have grave doubts about Clarke!

However;

NOT once did he ever make any comments / conduct any interviews whereby he voiced his opinions and more important solutions.

ON THE CONTRARY, Clarke has repeatedly supported openly wearing his SKY hat, policies that damaged our international team! Namely too many imports; manipulation of the import ruling. I note he has not resigned from SKY on the ground the pay too little for RL and thus we have to play too many matches.

Clarke was also part of a GB management team that openly stated repeatedly that they selected players involved on the GF etc because they were 'match fit' and when we lost badly in the first Tri-Nations match he like the rest argued we were too rusty and probably needed a friendly hit up beforehand because both NZ and Aus had belted the hell out of each other already which made them better.

Clarke is one of many 'sound bite' figures that exist and talk the talk but when it comes to the crunch they never do very much or make a difference. They simply flirt from opportunity to opportunity without ever truly investing their time and effort.

The reality is that the RFL may not be perfect BUT they have put the game on a far better finacial footing than it was, they have tried to promote international rugby league in very difficult circumstances (Australia being a reluctant partner at times).

If Phil Clarke wants a great international team then the answer lies in a season that runs paralell with the NRL, providing time for tours / world cups / world club challenges pre season BUT more importantly the quality required come from supporting grass roots development and producing quality BRitish players. An extra coach or three and 1 or 2 less matches is short term tinkering.