|
|
Post by Druzik on Jul 28, 2009 21:51:05 GMT 10
im divided one this. the benefits of it happening could be great. exposure would be so good for our game. the reason im divided is that i can see triple digit scorelines and on paper the inequity of the teams is way too large at the moment. in saying this i think back to the kangaroos/ tomohawaks game. USA almost had that game in the bag.... Why is it Ok for Union to rack up triple didgit score lines and not us?? There are soccer games that go into double didgits, Australia beat samoa 31-0 once... does anyone go round shouting that its a farce of a sport? No... why should we always live in fear of blow outs? |
|
|
|
Post by England 3 Lions on Aug 12, 2009 1:21:09 GMT 10
im divided one this. the benefits of it happening could be great. exposure would be so good for our game. the reason im divided is that i can see triple digit scorelines and on paper the inequity of the teams is way too large at the moment. in saying this i think back to the kangaroos/ tomohawaks game. USA almost had that game in the bag.... Why is it Ok for Union to rack up triple didgit score lines and not us?? There are soccer games that go into double didgits, Australia beat samoa 31-0 once... does anyone go round shouting that its a farce of a sport? No... why should we always live in fear of blow outs? You have a point. The upside to scheduling matches between the heavyweights and the lightweights is it offers the latter an incentive to continue with the sport and try to crack into the major leagues. The players from the minnow nations should be rewarded for dedicating their time to a sport that's unknown to the bulk of their fellow countrymen. In my opinion, the players from the second-tier nations are pioneers of our sport. I respect them as much as I respect Wally Lewis, Johnathon Thurston, Allan Langer, etc. Giving the players from the minnow nations an opportunity to test themselves against the best in the business will entice them -- and their fellow countrymen -- to stick with the sport and strive to improve theri game until they're one of the elite. Their children and their children's friends will take the game more seriously when they see it's possible for people from Russia, Latvia, Lebonon, Catalonia etc to play against the best in the business from Australia, New Zealand, England etc. |
|
|
|
Post by Druzik on Aug 12, 2009 8:26:39 GMT 10
Exactly Bruce
I am not saying throw estonia in to the deepend with England rright from the start, but if a team works its way up over a 2-3 year period to earn a place at the big table then why not.
Like you say you need to have the incentive there.
|
|
|
|
Post by England 3 Lions on Aug 15, 2009 0:34:39 GMT 10
Exactly Bruce I am not saying throw estonia in to the deepend with England rright from the start, but if a team works its way up over a 2-3 year period to earn a place at the big table then why not. Like you say you need to have the incentive there. The other great thing about giving the 'Best of the Rest' a game or two against the big guns is it allows their players to gain valuable experience. They might lose by 100 or so points, but they'll learn a thing or two that'll make them better players in the future. The other lower-ranked teams they play against will improve once they see their newly acquired skill-sets. |
|
|
|
Post by arh21980 on Sept 3, 2009 10:23:05 GMT 10
Call to put Ashes back on rugby calendar
September 3, 2009 - 6:02AM
English rugby league boss Richard Lewis has called on Australia to put rugby league's Ashes up for grabs when they face England next month.
Although the Ashes are traditionally associated with cricket clashes between England and Australia, it is also the name given to meetings between the Australians and Great Britain in rugby league.
Australia have held the rugby league Ashes since 1970 but they haven't been contested since 2003.
Now Lewis is backing England players Jamie Peacock and Jon Wilkin and ex-Kangaroos Brad Fittler, Gorden Tallis and Max Krilich, who have proposed that England and Australia play for the Ashes when they meet in the Four Nations at Wigan on October 31.
Australian Rugby League officials will discuss the suggestion this week and Lewis said: "There is so much history and tradition surrounding the Ashes Trophy that it makes no sense whatsoever to have it gathering dust in a cabinet year after year.
"The Ashes have brought out the best in generations of players since they were first played for in 1908 and it would be fantastic if the current England and Australia players were given the same opportunity.
"I am aware that some people have reservations about playing for the Ashes Trophy in a one-off fixture, especially within the Four Nations, but the sport has more to gain than it stands to lose from bringing the Ashes back.
"When England play Scotland in rugby union they do so for the Calcutta Cup and there is no suggestion that it detracts from the significance of the Six Nations Championship.
"There are few names in any sport that are more evocative than the Ashes and I can understand why some people in Australia may be reluctant to let them go, especially given what's happened recently in cricket.
"However I would urge the ARL to have the courage of their convictions and put the Ashes back on the international calendar."
|
|
|
|
Post by Druzik on Sept 3, 2009 10:27:00 GMT 10
My question is this. Will it be the roundrobin game or if the two make the final, will it be the two matches that count.
I also reckon the Australie-France trophy should be on the line!
|
|
|
|
Post by arh21980 on Sept 3, 2009 11:25:34 GMT 10
My question is this. Will it be the roundrobin game or if the two make the final, will it be the two matches that count. I also reckon the Australie-France trophy should be on the line! I think that all International trophies should be on the line bar the World Cup. This means the Baskerville for when the Kiwis play the English, Ashes when Australia play England, Australie-France Trophy, whatever the kiwis play the french for. I think when Australia plays PNG that the trophy that they play for should be the Kokada Cup Its really got me buggered why they didn't incoperate the exsiting trophies into the 3 Nations and now the 4 Nations like Union does |
|
|
|
Post by Druzik on Sept 3, 2009 22:24:00 GMT 10
My question is this. Will it be the roundrobin game or if the two make the final, will it be the two matches that count. I also reckon the Australie-France trophy should be on the line! I think that all International trophies should be on the line bar the World Cup. This means the Baskerville for when the Kiwis play the English, Ashes when Australia play England, Australie-France Trophy, whatever the kiwis play the french for. I think when Australia plays PNG that the trophy that they play for should be the Kokada Cup Its really got me buggered why they didn't incoperate the exsiting trophies into the 3 Nations and now the 4 Nations like Union doesBecause its rugby league.....  |
|
|
|
Post by arh21980 on Sept 4, 2009 9:50:16 GMT 10
Australian Rugby League officials have decided to put their 36-year domination over England and Great Britain for the sport's Ashes on the line in a one-off game next month.
ARL chief executive Geoff Carr has confirmed that Australia and England will play one-off matches for the 101-year-old title over the next three seasons, beginning on October 31 in Wigan during the Four Nations series. The system will then be reviewed.
The trophy is normally contested over a three-match series and former Australian captains were divided over an English proposal that it be handed to the winner of a one-off game.
"We decided that we will put the trophy on the line in that game at the end of next month," Carr said.
"There was some suggestion that it be decided based on however many games we play in a given season but we can't say for sure that England or Australia would make a Four Nations final.
"So it's going to be one game per year for the next three years."
The Ashes trophy is currently on display at the National Museum in Canberra and will be transported to Britain for the Four Nations, which kicks off on October 23.
Series between Australia and England, the Northern Union or Great Britain have been known as the Ashes since 1908. But there are no such series planned until after the 2013 World Cup, with Australia to have 2012 off at the request of players.
Britain won the trophy in Australia in 1970, the green and golds regained it in the UK during 1973 and have held it ever since.
Current Australian captain Darren Lockyer and predecessors Laurie Daley, Arthur Beetson, John Raper and Bob McCarthy have said they are opposed to the title being decided in one match.
But Brad Fittler, Max Krilich and Gorden Tallis had no problem with the idea, first raised publicly by England skipper Jamie Peacock at the beginning of last week
|
|
|
|
Post by Druzik on Sept 4, 2009 10:35:42 GMT 10
I say this shouls go one step further...
Since england were so keen for the ashes to be on the line, lets put the Baskerville Trophy up for grabs as well and the Australie-France trophy!
|
|
|
|
Post by supersteve on Sept 6, 2009 9:07:39 GMT 10
I actually saw all these trophies when I was in Melbourne a couple of months ago. They had the Legends of League exhibit on at the sports museum at the MCG.
I for one am glad to see these absolutely magnificent trophies being put on the line again. Unions tri-series includes the Bledisloe aswell, including the ashes in the Four Nations wont devalue the Four Nations IMO. One thing I read in the paper about this during the week was from Darren Lockyer, who said he would possibly prefer to have it a fully-fledged series every two years, rather than just the one game every year. Personally I dont mind too much either way, I think using these historical trophies adds a lot of interest to the games. Its one thing to try make up a trophy for an annual fixture between two teams, but its totally different when we have this trophy with so much history behind it already.
I suspect Australians will be very keen to see the Ashes contested over here next year after losing the Ashes in cricket!.
|
|
|
|
Post by Druzik on Sept 6, 2009 10:31:25 GMT 10
I actually saw all these trophies when I was in Melbourne a couple of months ago. They had the Legends of League exhibit on at the sports museum at the MCG. I for one am glad to see these absolutely magnificent trophies being put on the line again. Unions tri-series includes the Bledisloe aswell, including the ashes in the Four Nations wont devalue the Four Nations IMO. One thing I read in the paper about this during the week was from Darren Lockyer, who said he would possibly prefer to have it a fully-fledged series every two years, rather than just the one game every year. Personally I dont mind too much either way, I think using these historical trophies adds a lot of interest to the games. Its one thing to try make up a trophy for an annual fixture between two teams, but its totally different when we have this trophy with so much history behind it already. I suspect Australians will be very keen to see the Ashes contested over here next year after losing the Ashes in cricket!. I'll be honest... and I have said this in the past... I think the tours are an outdated concept that only serves to strengthen position of the choosen few and hionders any true development of the game... none of the trully global sports have these things. I am happy its being put on the line, but I havent heard of the other ones are being put up as well... oh well. But they can always go on the line in these regional tournaments I proposed. But I know that the tours seem to be popular with people... and I made provisions for them in my scheduling. But I am happy that its being done. |
|
|
|
Post by England 3 Lions on Sept 7, 2009 22:55:34 GMT 10
I actually saw all these trophies when I was in Melbourne a couple of months ago. They had the Legends of League exhibit on at the sports museum at the MCG. I for one am glad to see these absolutely magnificent trophies being put on the line again. Unions tri-series includes the Bledisloe aswell, including the ashes in the Four Nations wont devalue the Four Nations IMO. One thing I read in the paper about this during the week was from Darren Lockyer, who said he would possibly prefer to have it a fully-fledged series every two years, rather than just the one game every year. Personally I dont mind too much either way, I think using these historical trophies adds a lot of interest to the games. Its one thing to try make up a trophy for an annual fixture between two teams, but its totally different when we have this trophy with so much history behind it already. I suspect Australians will be very keen to see the Ashes contested over here next year after losing the Ashes in cricket!. I'll be honest... and I have said this in the past... I think the tours are an outdated concept that only serves to strengthen position of the choosen few and hionders any true development of the game... none of the trully global sports have these things. I am happy its being put on the line, but I havent heard of the other ones are being put up as well... oh well. But they can always go on the line in these regional tournaments I proposed. But I know that the tours seem to be popular with people... and I made provisions for them in my scheduling. But I am happy that its being done. I think there's still a place in the sport for a Test match tour program. Provided the tours are not overused, they can help the sport capitalise on the rivalries among the sport's traditional nations (IE. Australia, England, New Zealand, France and Papua New Guinea), and help the sport's newest acquisitions raise the sport's profile in their respective lands by milking the historical rivalries they have with one another. Traditional Playing Nations The most prestigious tour of them all would an Ashes tour. If it was based on the model used in cricket, it could help lure young Englishmen and Australians away from rugby union because they don't have an equivalent to it. Cricket is lucrative to many youngsters in Australia and England because they want to play in an Ashes series. If the RFL, ARL and RLIF can develop the same sort of aura for the Rugby League Ashes then it would give the sport a huge edge over rugby union. The sport's newest acquistions, such as Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia, Germany, Italy, Russia, Lebanon and Morocco, could add a lot of emotion to their the Test matches they play against one another by basing the respective trophies they play for on cultural/historical themes. For example, the Russians and Germans could play for a piece of silverware that honours the Germans and Russians who were killed by each other's armies during WWII. Something like that would help the sport attract much needed attention from the media in Russia and Germany. If it's the first time it's been done in any sport then it might draw attention from USA, Canada and other non-traditional rugby league nations. |
|
|
|
Post by Marv on Sept 14, 2009 18:03:40 GMT 10
Why is it Ok for Union to rack up triple didgit score lines and not us?? There are soccer games that go into double didgits, Australia beat samoa 31-0 once... does anyone go round shouting that its a farce of a sport? No... why should we always live in fear of blow outs? Because they make that particular game look a farce Druzik, when Australia did beat Samoa in Soccer by that many they were moved into the Asian Qualification series so they could get better competition. Nobody wants to see blowouts, stop calling for them ;D |
|
