Rugby league has always been defined by its hard-as-nails players, who give the word ‘tough’ a new meaning.

When fans come together to wax lyrical about the topic, moments such as South Sydney second rower John Sattler’s heroic display in the 1971 grand final while nursing a broken jaw, or Sam Burgess’ similar feats in this year’s decider are at the centre of each discussion.

Similarly, it seems as though not an Origin series goes by without a player being alluded to as a ‘hero’ for playing through a debilitating injury in order to help steer his team to victory.

Rugby league is not a game for the faint hearted.

With the game’s proven history of players taking pride in their battle scars, it came as somewhat of a surprise that so many top-level international players chose to bow out of the Four Nations tournament due to injury.

While I do not condone the somewhat masochistic nature of playing through pain, it seemed as though players sought exemption due to injuries which they otherwise would not have given a second thought if it were a State of Origin or finals contest in question.

Many of the game’s officials and onlookers almost immediately singled out the taxing length of the season, which is admittedly something that needs to change sooner rather than later. However, amidst the upheaval and commotion surrounding the issue of scheduling, one issue went almost ignored – the lack of reverence with which the game’s players treat international rugby league.

While undoubtedly still a proud achievement for younger players, it seems as though international selection is looked upon as something of a burden, particularly by those who have already taken part in the rigours of Origin and finals football.

This lack of favour is in stark contrast to the early days of international rugby league, when it was looked upon as the preeminent fixture of the rugby league calendar, and Kangaroos jerseys were keenly contested. In those days, Australia often found themselves in the position of the underdog, unheard of in today’s rugby league climate.

In 1951, Australia faced a mighty French team in a three-game Test series, which they lost in a clean sweep. It was this disappointing loss that had them marked as outsiders leading into the inaugural Rugby League World Cup in 1954, which was played in the same format as today’s Four Nations, and featured the same number of countries.

The tournament, referred to at the time as ‘The Rugby World Cup’, was marked by similar failure for the Australians as three years earlier, winning only one of their games, against New Zealand 28-13. In the fiercely contested final, played in front of 30,368 fans at the Parc des Princes in Paris, England defeated France 16-12, winning the first of their two World Cup trophies.

For the remainder of the 1950s, the Kangaroos would continue to experience mixed results, as they prevailed in the second World Cup tournament in 1957, before losing a three-game ashes series to England on the 1959-60 Kangaroo tour.

For the next two decades, Australia slowly began turning the tide of international rugby league in their favour. In 1972, England won what would be their last ever World Cup title, before Australia won every tournament until 2008, in which they lost to New Zealand in the final. Following their 1978 Ashes victory, England would not win an international series against Australia for 15 years.

By the 1980s, Australia had established themselves as the powerhouse we know today, with world-class players such as Eric Grothe, Peter Sterling and Wally Lewis tearing apart their opposition with ease. Ironically, as Australia rose to prominence on the international stage, a new phenomenon emerged which would dramatically influence the future of international football.

State of Origin was a big hit with fans, due to the fierce interstate rivalry between New South Wales and Queensland, and the spectacular sight of seeing club mates as opposition for one night only. Following two one-off games in 1980 and ’81, State of Origin became a three-game series in 1982.

By the early ’90s, the interstate rivalry had established itself as the most anticipated representative fixture each season, towards which the majority of attention was placed by the players, fans and officials.

The rise of Origin football coincided with the steady decline of international rugby league. Plagued by the Super League war which had ravaged the code, Australia still managed to continue their dominance through the ’90s, despite having two teams from 1995-97 – one which only selected players who were loyal to the Australian Rugby League, and another which featured Super League players.

In 1998, the traditional Kangaroos tour became yet another casualty of the Super League war, being cancelled.

The decade of the 90s also featured two World Cups, which had become something of an anomaly in the world of rugby league. Lacking the promotional support which its FIFA and rugby union counterparts enjoyed for their centrepiece events, the 1995 tournament in particular was greeted with great pessimism from the league community.

Unlike the first tournament in 1954, much of the concern revolved around the issue of competitiveness, or lack thereof, which would deem the World Cup to be a waste of time, particularly as the ’95 edition featured 10 teams, most of them minnow nations who had no chance of winning.

Sure enough, Australia defeated England in the Final, played at Wembley Stadium in London, clinching their fifth successive title and eighth overall.

If the 1995 World Cup signified the death blow for the once-esteemed tournament, then the mediocre 2000 tournament was the nail in the coffin.

Although it was backed by a record sponsorship of over £1 million from Lincoln Financial Group, an overwhelming number of one-sided contests and poor attendance figures marked it as an unsuccessful World Cup which only served to confirm doubts that rugby league was unable to host an international event on such a large scale.

In the semi-finals, England was blown out of the water by New Zealand to the tune of 49-6, while Australia cruised to a 46-22 win over Wales. Those hoping to see more of a competitive match between Australia and New Zealand in the final were disappointed, as the Kangaroos prevailed 40-12. It was a telling sign of the poor state in which international rugby league had found itself.

Off the back of the 2000 World Cup, which was a disaster both financially and results-wise, the decision was made to call an end to the tournament, at least for the time being. In 2004, the success of the newly-created Tri-Nations tournament, which was contested between Australia, New Zealand and Great Britain, saw many proclaim the beginning of an international resurgence.

Still, old problems remained. Despite it being a great deal more entertaining, and competitive, than any international tournament in recent memory, Australia still prevailed in dominant fashion, defeating Great Britain in the final 44-6.

Although it only added to the colossal workload of the game’s top players, particularly those in the green and gold, the inaugural Tri-Nations tournament (not counting the series of the same name which took place in 1999) was seen as an exciting opportunity by players and fans alike. When the Kiwis won the tournament in 2005, it seemed as though the proper steps were finally being taken to re-establish the credibility of international rugby league.

After another successful Tri-Nations in 2006, capped off by a final between Australia and New Zealand which will go down as one of the greatest games played between the two countries, the tournament was a notable omission from the representative calendar in 2007.

Instead, it was replaced by a one-off Test match between the Kiwis and the Kangaroos, which Australia easily won 58-0. The reasoning for the competition’s exemption was not due to lack of competition or disappointing attendance figures, but the re-introduction of the Rugby League World Cup.

In 2008, Australian rugby league’s centenary year, the game’s officials decided that a serious attempt at re-launching the World Cup would be a fitting way to celebrate. Following the success of the Tri-Nations, the World Cup was seen as the next logical step in the advancement of international rugby league.

Backed by an impressive promotional campaign, Australia played host to one of the most successful Rugby League World Cups in history. In a unique draw, four of the tournament’s top nations were placed in the same pool during the group stages, ensuring competitive matches throughout the competition.

Following what had been a largely entertaining and well-attended World Cup, New Zealand upset Australia in the final at Suncorp Stadium, which had been sold out months in advance. The tournament was hailed a success by the game’s organisers, as well as the fans, garnering over $5 million in profit.

For all the success of the World Cup, international rugby league was in no different position than it had been four years prior. At the top were two dominant sides, arguably three if one wishes to include England, while every other team had no chance of coming close to competing with the top-tier nations. In fact, there weren’t even enough sides for competitive semi-finals, as Australia demolished Fiji 58-0. This is in stark contrast to the Rugby World Cup, which features at least six teams – from both the northern and southern hemisphere – with a viable chance of winning the trophy.

The problem is further accentuated by the Four Nations tournament, which takes much of the shine off a World Cup victory. Because it features the only teams with a shot of winning the cup, the annual series is essentially a smaller version of the World Cup. This was the case in 2009, when Australia defeated England in the final 46-16 – yet another indication of the disparity between the two countries – and the Kiwis success the year before was all but forgotten.

In 2013 after Australia won the World Cup, it was treated almost the same as a Four Nations victory. Furthermore, for all of the increase in competiveness between the top-tier nations, the Kangaroos’ 34-2 victory over the Kiwis in the final served to remind us of their overwhelming, and at times boring, dominance, which is also reflected in their amazing 84.2 per cent winning record.

Although the Kiwis prevailed in this year’s Four Nations, the major talking point following their victory was that it had only come after defeating a second-string Australian side.

The problem in the approach to international rugby league is the focus on decreasing the overall disparity. Ideally, officials and fans would like to see teams such as France, Ireland and Wales be as competitive as their rugby union counterparts, but it isn’t possible.

Firstly, the popularity of union in those countries far exceeds that of rugby league, and they also have established domestic competitions which help to breed world-class players. On an international scale, rugby league lacks both the resources and popularity to truly become a global presence. At the moment, the game is stuck in a familiar rut; each year, either New Zealand or Australia win the Four Nations tournament, while England does enough to remain competitive without coming close to victory.

If the game’s officials truly want to fix the problems surrounding international rugby league, and the alarming rate at which players are pulling out of the Four Nations, they could do worse than go back to the inaugural World Cup in 1954.

Instead of focusing on the quantity of nations, focus on quality. However, instead of featuring four teams, perhaps they could expand to include an additional two; Papua New Guinea and Samoa, or even a combined Pacific Islands team.

Instead of the Four Nations taking place every year, in what is a crowded rugby league calendar, the tournament should be scrapped in favour of the aforementioned World Cup concept, which would be played in the same format as the Four Nations. Taking its place each year would be a series of one-off Test matches played between rival nations.

While New Zealand and Australia battle in the annual mid-season Anzac Test, both sides could then face England at the end of the season in one-off Test matches. Meanwhile, France could face a Pacific Islands side in a battle of two of the less competitive rugby league nations. This would serve the purpose of keeping the interest, as well as competition, in international rugby league between each World Cup tournament.

In a time where international success in rugby league is not as revered as it once was, steps must be taken to amend this worrying attitude.

If success or failure wasn’t able to be avenged with each coming season, and another Four Nations tournament, it would be held in much higher regard by both players and fans.