- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
There have been a number of articles and comments about the Rugby League World Cup on The Roar this week.
Though I originally decided to stay well clear of the debate – as some of the comments on both sides of the argument have bordered on the absurd – I do just want to make one point in response to a particular criticism of the tournament.
There has been a lot of bashing of the RLWC, with it common to hear the event labeled as a farce, a joke, irrelevant and not really a World Cup.
The main basis for those sentiments seems be based upon the eligibility laws of the tournament, and the perception some countries are trotting out ‘rented’ players.
On Monday, Roarer Cameron Treloar wrote a piece in which he said the RLWC was a farce. Though Cam and I came to somewhat of a truce, I thought I’d repeat here the comment I posted on his article:
“Cameron, I think you – and other detractors of the Rugby League World Cup – are looking at it in slightly the wrong way.
When comparing it to similar tournaments like the rugby union or Football World Cups, though it has obvious name similarities, it’s not an apples and apples comparison.
The aforementioned World Cups are true representative tournaments, with players representing their country of birth (or long-term inhabitance).
The intent of the Rugby League World Cup, outside of the Australian, English and New Zealand teams, is not really about representative football, it’s about growing the game past its existing strongholds.
Yes the eligibility rules are lax, but that’s because the tournament is about growing the game, giving it a higher profile in countries in which it has a low one, and possibly even expanding the game’s footprint.
These are not new strategies, nor ones exclusive to rugby league. And when other codes have tried such objectives, they’ve been met with derision as well.
When the Swans moved to Sydney, the sentiment was Aussie Rules will never take off in the town, but the code had a long-term vision that involved short-term pain for long term gain.
When the AFL expands, new teams are given salary cap concessions and priority draft picks, which some fans have also called ‘farcical’, but such measures are taken because growth sometimes has to be artificially achieved, while in its infancy.
I look at the eligibility rules of the RLWC in much the same manner. They may seem farcical to you, but it’s simply a way to kick-start interest in areas rugby league is far from dominant.
Rugby league may still not take off in any of these countries, but surely it’s worth a shot? After all, in this competitive sporting landscape, if you’re standing still, you’re going backwards.”
The point about artificial growth is an important one, because it’s certainly not unique to rugby league. Not only does the AFL employ similar tactics with their new clubs, but rugby union does as well.
Super Rugby franchises the Western Force and the Melbourne Rebels are allowed more overseas players than the other three franchisees. This helps the Force and Rebels, who simply don’t have the local talent to fill their squads just yet.
‘Generous’ eligibility laws in the Rugby League World Cup, salary cap concessions and priority draft picks in the AFL, and additional overseas player rules in Super Rugby, all have relatively the same objective: helping new teams, and artificially growing the respective games in new geographical locations.
Though it doesn’t guarantee success, or the desired growth, it remains a smart strategy.