What should legitimately be called a World Cup?

True Tah said  | October 17th 2008 @ 7:32am | Report comment

Millster,

I have a pretty hectic day, so Im going to get in first.

My main issue with the RL World Cup is that there were teams were manufactured at the expense of other fair dinkum teams.

Take for example Lebanon. They were told they had to go and develop their own domestic comp if they ever wanted to compete again. They promptly went out and did this, but didn’t qualify for the WC. Scotland and Ireland on the other hand went out and picked any guy in NRL or ESL with a Mc or an O in their surname and handed them a jersey.

For mine it would be a real kick in the guts for the guys involved in Lebanese Rugby League, it was a chance to bring some pride to a country which hasn’t had a whole lot to cheer about, and in a country where people probably laugh at them for not playing futbol.

Hopefully things will only get better, the reason I say this is that the 1987 rugby world cup was an invitation only event - and a few non-invitees (Samoa, Spain, Korea, USSR and South Africa) were pissed that they didn’t get a chance to come to the party. Now we are looking at 2011, and some of the countries still in the running to qualify are Uganda, Tunisia, Papua New Guinea, Moldova, Georgia, Chile, Portugal, Ivory Coast, Germany, Uruguay.

Having said that, Millster, I still think its a valid world cup to see who is the best rugby league nation on the planet - I personally wouldn’t want to front the Tongan and Samoan RL teams and tell it to the face that their competition is a joke. Im hoping to get out to see these two teams battling it out at Penrith Stadium.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Pippinu said  | October 17th 2008 @ 8:38am | Report comment

Being a lover of the indigenous game, I can’t really criticise League for trying something like this. But I will add a couple of things:

1. Upon being introduced to League in the early to mid 80s, I have a recollection that there was some sort of World Cup that involved the five main nations: Australia, Great Britain, New Zealand, PNG and France. I think it was on a sort of round robin basis, but the majority of the games were quite competitive. That looked like a good basis to build a regular, enduring international comp, but it seemed to fall away immediately afterwards. It seems to me that it is only a small jump from those five to having a viable international series of 8 nations, split into two groups of four.

2. One thing I am not liking at the moment is the switching of players from the island nations to the larger, more developed nations. If there is one thing that will kill the credibility and viability of the comp - it is precisely that. Surely we should be going out of our way to see the flow go the other way, rather than favouring the established nations?

3. This is a personal, biased view - but for me, there can only ever be one world cup, full stop. Having said that, I agree with TT that League has every right to have a periodic international championship that pits all League playing nations against each other - a better choice of name might be the way to go.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

oikee said  | October 17th 2008 @ 9:34am | Report comment

Besides , if you dont call it a world cup then that means the world is not invited, any country can have a crack as long as they have a domstic comp which incourages growth, which is normal. As for lebanon they had a real chance to qualify and i would say that they will be in the next world cup along with wales as these 2 teams only just missed out, i know its slow but we are getting there and there is other countries with domestic comps. I think they were only 2-4 points away from being in this world cup squad.?

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Michael C said  | October 17th 2008 @ 9:58am | Report comment

I reckon - - people shouldn’t be too elitist about comparison of code vs code.

For each code - it comes down to the purpose of a given tournament.

If the tournament is purely a developmental one - - with some of the best countries NOT playing - - then, like the ICC they run separate ICC tournaments to develop nations who can via that, qualify for the cricket world cup. Yep, the number of minnows in there is a moot point, but, they had to qualify to get there.

The AFL could in a sense have run a world cup - - allowing parentage and ex-pats to allow players to ‘opt’ to play for countries in which they simply reside or that they had a parent or even grand parent from. For the AFL - it wouldn’t serve any purpose. For the RL folk - - they’ve obviously deemed that it DOES serve a purpose. Fair enough then. And we should all respect that, but……….at the same time, they had better have deemed that the purpose served is more than just a token effort to ‘compete’ with the WC events of the IRB or FIFA - - because that would just be superficial.

btw - I do get sick of soccer folk deeming that all things are effectively meaningless by comparison to the FIFA WC. Fare enough, they pale in comparison……..but,……..certainly not meaningless. And, I’d point out that there’s a big difference between highly paid professionals having their way paid and facilitated by the big money of a FIFA WC - - compared to amateurs who sacrifice time, money and effort just to compete (and most likely get hammered)……………..whose journey is more the true meaning of ’sport’??

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

True Tah said  | October 17th 2008 @ 10:15am | Report comment

well said MC.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Millster said  | October 17th 2008 @ 10:30am | Report comment

I’ll add my congrats to MC for a good post. On 2 things you said:

“at the same time, they had better have deemed that the purpose served is more than just a token effort to ‘compete’ with the WC events of the IRB or FIFA - - because that would just be superficial”

This is exactly my point. I am not calling for the stopping of such tournaments, just the clear differentiation of them. They serve different purposes and exist in different contexts, and it invites the superficial comparisons that you raise for tournaments that are VERY valid but by no measure really World Cups to use that name.

“whose journey is more the true meaning of ’sport’??”

An impossible question to answer. That said I’m not sure there is a ‘true meaning of sport’ to assess that against. But you are right, each journey should be respected for what it is. At least I hope this is what you are saying, and not valuing some battling-from-adversity story above others where there is more support available. Again I am not arguing that any player’s path to any competition is meaningless. I admire the dedication and commitment involved. I even agree that the road in some sports is less smooth than in others, especially for players from poorer or more fringe countries. (On a minor point MC, I’d encourage you to check out just how much of that ‘big FIFA money’ gets to certain teams in the African, Oceanian or parts of the Asian confederations - some teams that don’t qualify for finals do amazing things and endure great hardships just to be part of the experience of the qualifying rounds).

Bottom line is there is no suggestion of meaninglessness - apart from the core message of my article which is that the stupid use of the title World Cup might SUBTRACT rather than ADD meaning and credibility to an international tournament which could be named far more appropriately.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

oikee said  | October 17th 2008 @ 10:37am | Report comment

The other thing that is also in unions and league and also Aussie rules favour is that we get to see world cup games being played in this country, say we have a soccer world cup here , just making a point 2018, ok thats it, no more world cup soccer for this country for the next 50 years with so many involved. Now the other codes will have to have the cups played in around 5-7 for union, maybe only one for aussie rules so far, and maybe 2-3 for league, so we all get to enjoy going to a world cup here in oz more often, and thats good bussiness for oz. I have mentioned before that we should have the league world cup only here in oz but that wont happen, i think england has the next one after that maybe we might again enjoy another world cup here, thats 2 with-in 10 years. Nothing wrong with that, and oz keeps getting shown to the world.
Governments love that.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Clutch Cable said  | October 17th 2008 @ 10:52am | Report comment

“What you have not thought about Millster is that over 50 years ago the world cup soccer was really a joke also, how many countries where really involved back then, not all that many”

56 countries entered qualification for the 1958 World Cup.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

oikee said  | October 17th 2008 @ 10:53am | Report comment

Thats opened up a can of worms redb, calling the a-league sub-standard, will let millster deal with you, but i agree with what you have said and thanks for pointing out that american baseball comment, i did not know that.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

oikee said  | October 17th 2008 @ 10:57am | Report comment

Thanks clutch compared to over what 230 now, and even now out of them i and many others would say that there just making up the numbers for the top 30 teams who really have any chance at all, according to others only 8 teams have any real chance. Anyway thats another story.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Michael C said  | October 17th 2008 @ 11:03am | Report comment

oikee -

realistically, to defeat Australia - - you need a core squad of 40 top notch players to pick from……..not just 40 players full stop. That, therefore, ain’t gonna happen in the next 40 years one wouldn’t think.

In the short term, perhaps an ‘international’ team could be ‘constructed’ for an Aust vs Rest of the World - - combining Irish origin AFL players, players of very obvious ‘other nationality’ origin (i.e. born in Samoa for example), and over the next few years we seriously expect to see some PNG and South African kids especially coming into the system via the development in those 2 countries. So, Aust vs Rest of the World - - I could envisage………..but, again, to have a top notch squad of about 40 to pick from (allowing therefore for injuries, form etc so as to seriously challenge a best of - Aussie - team), that’s a little way off.

The main challenge is for AFL to encourage more juniors overseas - - there’s isolated pockets that offer encouragement and the promise of a ‘next generation’ of players, and a first generation of ‘home grown’ coaches etc. That’s slow organic stuff. But - - either way, you need a ’stage’ upon which 16 year olds can ’shine’ and perhaps, for now, enticed to Australia for high level development pathways. That then, would create opportunities for talented kids from NZ, US, Canada, Europe etc to perhaps give this strange game a go (amongst their other activities) - - and at least be offered an opportunity.

There are already kids from Canada and New Zealand for example who have discovered the game and prefer it to the variety of soccer, basketball, rugby, volleyball etc that they grew up with. So - - it CAN happen.

The wild card is that some where like America might reach a critical population at which the game proceeds to semi-pro and perhaps a good enough niche ‘pro’ league that they can develop their own talent sufficiently to proceed independant of the Australian pathway. More so, somewhere like the US, than PNG or Sth Africa - - due the economics of it all.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

oikee said  | October 17th 2008 @ 11:09am | Report comment

Hey redb, i have mentioned the sudanese here where we live, you wait until they start playing, i think the smallest guys are around 6′3 and then range up to 7 foot. And on the quiet i will also say they are very good breeders. very good, lets just say the pram industry here is going threw the roof.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

oikee said  | October 17th 2008 @ 11:15am | Report comment

Like you said M.C the yanks are the most likely, i know they watch the game and have teams over there, also saw somewhere that they have some kids now playing in and around london.

Urban myth, but have to say if the yanks want to call it world series who is going to tell them its not. Some of them also think that america is the world?

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

oikee said  | October 17th 2008 @ 11:19am | Report comment

I am not comparing millster you are, i just said that back then soccer was in a simalar boat, and your 8, i dont know where you get your info from if australia is going for their 10th world cup win this year.?

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Michael C said  | October 17th 2008 @ 11:22am | Report comment

oikee -

that’s a salient point, isn’t it - - how many are just making up the numbers.

The all encompassing ‘world cup’ of soccer, to a degree - is a massive ‘ego trip’. But, it means at the outset - that seedings don’t give any one automatic entry (only the host nation gets that). But, reality is - you could achieve the same end with a series of ‘minnows’ qualificaiton tournaments.

We know that the nature of a defensively geared game like soccer can reduce ‘blow outs’ - and so, the talent gap isn’t quite so obvious.

However, in a lot of other sports - - the talent gap will be much, much more obvious. Rather like the old Aust 20 def Solomon Islands 0 in FIFA Oceania. So - - for most the sports, a hugely attended World Cup isn’t ideal anyway. Nor, a all in qualification process.

I’ve mentioned before - - even for a sport like the AFL - - suddenly, we’ve got a ‘top 4′ or ‘top 6′ ‘developing’ nations who are pretty well way too good for the newest teams to play against - seriously. And that gap will get wider. There’s been a very narrow window of a 10 year period were all nations were pretty crap….really. Suddenly, a few are getting a bit good…….and so the International Cup in future years will need to be suitably structured so as not to - well, put it mildly - put lives at risk.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

oikee said  | October 17th 2008 @ 11:30am | Report comment

Millster, what do you , or better still what would you want leage to do, build a 200 thousand stadium so we could fill it here in brisbane just so i can say to you look, we got 200 thousand to our world cup. Thats stupid, the 52 thousand stadium was built with one thing in mind, good veiwing for each and every fan, and its acheived this by sell-out figures for all codes, what you have to do is get in 1st to get a seat. Nobody likes not to see the action so stadiums are of no value or little value to how many might attend, if your countries involved then of course you want to be there. Anyway thats going off the track.

And yes i love that soccer history, its good to have, we also have some in league, it was called the battle of brisbane, and the bloodbath of bradford, look that one up, i think they had untold publicity in the papers due to the violence on the field, not off it.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Millster said  | October 17th 2008 @ 11:39am | Report comment

MC - the best (and current world record) is Australia 31 American Samoa 0 some years ago. And in practical terms yes I agree you can pick an almost definite 15 qualifiers for the World Cup with the other 15 being a bit more variable. But I think there is something grand about the fact that Brazil and Germany and Argentina start the journey from the same place each time as American Samoa and Laos and El Salvador and the Faroe Islands. The philosophy is not to have seeds and then for the ‘minnows’ to fight for the scraps of the few remaining places. Each team has an equal path to the places given to their confederations.

I also agree that there are downsides for codes of unevenness, especially once you get to a ‘finals’ type stage with TV visibility etc. Ireland (just to pick and example) may have some League potential but what are the few Ireland fans likely to do if they see their team beaten by 40 points by England, then 60 points but the Kiwis then 1000 points by the Aussies? Not so good for the spread of the game - they are more likely to give up on their team and go to other codes. At least football quarantines most of its blow-outs to the qualification rounds where, at best, they are only visible at continental level.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Michael C said  | October 17th 2008 @ 11:51am | Report comment

Millster -

re Ireland -

the example is interesting - - and there, it’s the exposure and the ‘appeal’ to fans. I think back to the India & Chinese teams who just recently competed and got soundly thrashed in earlier games against better opposition, but the last 2 rounds were the ‘finals’ all the way down to play off for 15th. By the time they had reached this game, they fully appreciated how hard it was to score, how hard a team had to work for each other and the journey - should they choose it - that lies ahead. BUT - - those 150 pts to nil thrashings………..are best NOT televised!!!!!

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Michael C said  | October 17th 2008 @ 12:08pm | Report comment

oikee -

this article today:
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/china-to-get-real-footy-ground/2008/10/16/1223750232353.html

there’s a Chinese Govt department that is trying to grow a range of sports - - you see this above, happening with zero AFL capital involved.

reality is, 1 billion Chinese, and if ONLY soccer, for example - were played and encouraged………..it’d serve no purpose, you can only get 11 on the park at any given time.

They have an aim to become a cricket super power.

It’s that whole thing, how many people you need and how efficient can you be.

Even US and Canada - - 350 million people - - roughly - - 1% = 3.5millin, 0.01% is 35,000. RL and AFL would gladly take 35,000 participants in a blink of an eye in the US.

If China and India start diversifying their sporting interests - the next 40-60 years might be extremely interesting as some traditional power balances get shifted.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Millster said  | October 17th 2008 @ 12:12pm | Report comment

Oikee - I will give you that. I think the structure of the comp is reasonably thought out, for what they have got. The pool B and C concepts will mean some ok games before the ‘business end’ ofthe tournament.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Michael C said  | October 17th 2008 @ 12:22pm | Report comment

well, we had ‘world series cricket’ triangular cricket tournaments each year………..’world’ vs ‘international’??

Just means that it’s NOT ‘national’ - only,

so, the NRL becomes the WRL,

and the NBL becomes the WBL…………..

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Michael C said  | October 17th 2008 @ 12:34pm | Report comment

oikee -

for so many pragmatic reasons - there should only be one ‘rugby’ offering in the broader ‘football’ product range.

re the AFL stuff…..

I love it ‘cos it isn’t really driven by the AFL - - it’s mostly using it’s own legs……….so, it’s rarely ever ‘top down’. That makes it tremendously curious to observe.

That, and as I’ve stated before - - all roads lead to Melbourne/Australia —– that gives a unique business tool……..likewise, the other codes - especially soccer - offer unique trade/networking possibilities. In the end - it’s all good.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Millster said  | October 17th 2008 @ 12:46pm | Report comment

MC - spot on again. AFL international cup was fantastic for a number of reasons, but the biggest and most amazing was thit was essentially participant-funded. Completely changes the dynamic, the perception, and the experience. Less ‘professional’ in the true sense of the word but in so many ways far more powerful. And I also agree that there should only be one rugby offering structurally and tat it would be a much stronger competitor than having 2 lesser codes, while of course respecting the cultures of League and Union and the forces that may make a merger a difficult and slow practical process.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

dasilva said  | October 17th 2008 @ 1:40pm | Report comment

Millster

Even if the team competing in the “World Cup” are generally restricted to a particular geo-political grouping such as the oceania region with RL or British Commonwealth with the Cricket. By calling RL World cup the PAcific league or the Cricket World CUp the British Commonwealth Cup it kinds of restricts and hampers and expansionist ambitions the sports have in the future. Right now Cricket is trying to expand in to China. If the premier tournament of Cricket is called the British Commonwealth Cup (which does admittently reflect Cricket current status) it will be a huge hindrance in trying to expand the game into China or in any other non-British Commonwealth region.

I have no problem in calling the premier international event of any particular sports the World Cup.If it doesn’t compare well to FIFA World CUp then so what.

In any case perhaps a different name to the World CUp may be beneficial to the sport in differentiate itself and avoiding comparisons that may make the event look unflattering but I don’t believe the events need a certain criteria to earn itself the right to call it the World Cup.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Michael C said  | October 17th 2008 @ 2:12pm | Report comment

daSilva -

agreed, it’s just a ‘tournament name’.

Agreed - - being a little too restrictive on some ‘geo-political’ historical perspective is being a little precious, me thinx.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Michael C said  | October 17th 2008 @ 2:48pm | Report comment

Millster -

yeah, but, it’s the ‘handball world’ that comes together to play.

More so cricket, as it does rattle around the globe, Europe/Britian, Asia, Africa, Australia, North America/Carribean - - - it’s a fair spread even if that is the footprint of the remnants of a colonial empire.

Cricket obviously hasn’t ballooned since then………..it really doesn’t ‘export’ well as ‘new business’…………what, with the need for ovals, pitches etc………but, the European championships have been held on a cricket oval in Austria built on an old cabbage patch…………(or was it onion patch?)

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

chris said  | October 17th 2008 @ 3:00pm | Report comment

MC one of your previous posts touched on african kids playing afl potentially. There will not be the same level of uptakes as there were with the greeks, italians etc in the 60’s.70s. Two reasons why: these kids have football in their blood. 2nd reason being globalisation. Kids who move here can now keep in touch and follow their favourite leagues around the world via paytv/internet. In the past an italian once an intalian arrived in Australia he/she had very little exposure in terms of international sport. Its very different nowadays. I guess also in the past euro’s wanted to feel part of australian culture, thus playing league/aussie rules. Thats not the case any more, soccer is now very much accepted in this country.

The aussie youth teams already have a number of african kids. I think there are 4 in the u17 oz team.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

oikee said  | October 17th 2008 @ 3:19pm | Report comment

I would love to change the rugby league world cup name, if you can help me millster we will, i will personally write to Colin love the international head of league and ask him to change the name to lets say, “The greatest game invites” , or maybe the “Gladiators do Battle”, or maybe “Crunch Time” why not just call it the “Gathering” its still open to all countries and the world is evolving like i have said, theres going to be aussie rules in china for pete’s sake. You really want to know what is boring, the word Football, i would love to get rid of this word along with the word rugby. And M.C , what are they going to do about the word aussie. ,,, is there anything on the horizon of changing this overseas.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

oikee said  | October 17th 2008 @ 3:26pm | Report comment

Spot on TT thats why soccer fans are so one eyed, they only ever really mostly know one sport. Different cultures different sport. Those african kids here in oz have it made, they have a choice.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Michael C said  | October 17th 2008 @ 3:27pm | Report comment

oikee -

well, it’s not ‘Aussie Rules’ officially, it’s actually ‘Australian Football’.

The ‘AFL’ is now effectively a ‘brand’ - that seemingly means ‘Australian Football League’ - - and for now that seems to be doing the job overseas.
However, the Kiwi coach of the NZ Falcons suggested they get over their ‘anti’ Australian issues by referring to it as ‘Action football’……….I don’t know how serious or broadly representative or otherwise that he was with that statement.

The Irish league is the ARFLI, (Australian Rules Football LEague of Ireland).

In the US, there’s “USfooty”.

That could work, try to claim ownership of ‘footy’………………why not, soccer tries to own ‘football’.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

oikee said  | October 17th 2008 @ 3:34pm | Report comment

Action footy sounds alright, the one thing is at least you might get a chance to get it right if you decide to change the name.
Better pull your fingers out, you dont want to leave it to long or come 20 years it will come back to bite your mob.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown: