I’ve been arguing for a long time that Australia and New Zealand need a regular three-match series every fourth year in the vein of the Bledisloe Cup.
With the Anzac Test, Four Nations Game 1 and now the final, effectively this year we’ll have had that.
So far the ledger for 2014 stands at one win apiece – however because there’s no unifying symbol to tie these matches together (unlike the Bledisloe) this fact will be lost on most people.
New Zealand is a small country with a smaller player pool, so the Kiwis should be expected to lose more often – if you were to use a direct percentage of population they should have a winning stat of around 20 per cent.
But since 2003 (the 100th anniversary game) the record for Australia versus New Zealand Test matches are as follows:
Kiwis
Seven wins (win ratio of 22 per cent)
Two draws
Twenty-three losses out of thirty-two games
But here’s the funny thing; here are the Bledisloe Cup stats for the same period:
Wallabies
Five wins (win ratio of 16 per cent)
Two draws
Twenty-seven losses out of thirty-four games
What insight can we gain from these facts?
The Wallabies are, well, the Wallabies. The Kiwis punch slightly above their weight. The number of games played is pretty close – 32 versus 34. If you take out the mid-season Test match (which heavily favours Australia) a series helps the Kiwis and sees the results draw even closer.
In short, the rugby league trans-Tasman rivalry is more competitive. So why aren’t the powers that be using these facts to promote these matches accordingly?
Smack bang in the middle of World Cups, 2015, would have been an ideal time to start such a four-year cycle. Instead the Kangaroos will be undertaking nap time.
I would suggest the first step would be dropping the mid-season Test match and replacing it with a guaranteed Australia versus New Zealand Test match two to three weeks after the grand final every year. This would also decrease the NRL season by one week. City versus Country should be replaced with a country round played in strategic regional areas.
The end of year Test match every season would stand alone, with the Anzac match becoming an event in its own right, but it would also be the base off which subsequent Four Nations and/or trans-Tasman series would be built.
William Dalton Davis
Roar Rookie
How about an ANZAC team that tours the European and pacific nations? 1. Slater 2. Manu 3. Morris 4. Hurrell 5. Morris 6. Foran 7. Thurston 8. Bromwich 9. Smith 10. Scott 11. Mannering 12. Thaiday 13. Taumalolo 14. Johnson 15. Proctor 16. Taupau 17. Parker
Alex L
Roar Rookie
Between NZ, QLD and ACT that's about 55% of the population, the rest of Australia couldn't give a hoot about either code. Not saying there isn't still a gap, but it's smaller than people realise if they assume SA, WA, and Victoria produce players (which they don't in the vast majority of cases). That's the point I was making.
Kris
Guest
People just cannot seem to admit that Australia is the best can they? It doesn't matter who would have been in the WC final, Aus would have still smashed them.
Tom G
Guest
I agree that is true for Rugby. With Rugby League however the Code is the major sport in two States which represent well over half the population of Australia. Compare this to England where the Game is played mostly in two counties, Lancashire and Yorkshire and even then is definitely not the major sport. In NZ the game is predominantly a North Island game and again not the major code. So even if you don't accept the population gap with the player pool Australia has a vastly superior number of players
Alex L
Roar Rookie
Population gap is radically overstated with regard to rugby codes, half of Aus doesn't have much interest in either code of Rugby.
Charles
Guest
One problem with PNG is that they have internal problems in their country regarding catchment areas in their own backyard. Their top tier comp (Digicel Cup) doesn't cover much of their country. http://www.rugbyleagueplanet.com/images/nations/papuanewguinea/papua-new-guinea-rugby-league-map.jpg
code 13
Roar Guru
Be careful. Using facts around here is risky business.
Johnno
Guest
In a funny little way of late Eng V NZ has been more exciting and more emotionally tense than Aus V Eng or Aus V NZ. Not so much coz aussies dominate, more maybe as 2 are trying to improve there's been a real rivalry building, and is now on par with games these 2 have vs OZ which can only be good for RL. The All Golds game a few years ago was good for the game.
dayer
Guest
i agree code 13, the kiwis were flat after the the semi final against England ... during the tournament the Aussies had 7 day turnarounds compared to the other nations.
Epiquin
Roar Guru
At the moment, the RLWC feels a bit more like a "festival of international rugby league" rather than a competitive World Cup. While I think that the RLWC can become more competitive and higher profile in the future, the short format tournaments are of great importance at the moment as a development vehicle.
Epiquin
Roar Guru
I know the players, and to a lesser extent the coaches, complain about the length of the season, but (at the risk of sounding like a heartless bastard), I don't know why this is of any concern to the fans. Obviously I don't want players suffering burnout and injury, but I also would love as much footy as I can get my hands on. I'm also skeptical about the whole notion of player burnout considering it was only recently that a number of high profile players were seeking permission to play Japanese rugby in the off-season to supplement their wages. I'm also only really talking about having the Four Nations begin during the NRL season, not the "Tonga vs Cook Islands" minnow games. Considering we already have a standalone Australia v NZ test early in the season, we would only need to fit a couple more games in. The rest can be played in October/November as it stands. Though I concede the NRL probably needs to be shortened a few weeks to make this work.
code 13
Roar Guru
It was the shield GB & NZ played for in 2002 & 2007 named after Albert Baskerville who organised the first All Golds tour. Again it's just a branding to unify the matches. Even something like the All Golds cup for NZ vs ENG has some sense of identification. I'm not sure what cup is up for offer in next year's series. But again - not being able to know - highlights the problem. The brand is everything.
code 13
Roar Guru
Internationals have the potential to overtake Origin in significance but again that's not necessarily tied to Origin declining. Rather Internationals could become the most popular rugby league event and Origin simply remain as popular as it is now.
pjm
Roar Rookie
What is Baskerville?
code 13
Roar Guru
I think we need Ashes, Anzac & Baskerville series Johnno, as I said once every 4 years. Essentially it's the same number of games as present but in a Branded format.
code 13
Roar Guru
Well the way I see it is a lot of people - fans, coaches, clubs, players - are whinging about the burden and impact of Origin on the NRL season... so why make it worse? When your club loses a key player for the season because they played for a Tonga vs Cook Islands match crammed between Origin, you'll see the same whinging start. Origin isn't going anywhere but I can't see those matches lasting. At least by dividing the calendar any players injured during the international season have until March to recover. A lot of sports would like to have seperate season for domestic and internationals, rugby league could easily achieve it.
code 13
Roar Guru
I think the main reason why we haven't seen their best yet is because very few people are going there to scout players. The talent is there, they just need professional training and opportunities. You just have to look at the players already signed after playing this year for the PNG Hunters. Their goal is to actually LOSE players because they want a more competitive test side and they know they're easily replaced.
pjm
Roar Rookie
The WC is good but it doesn't over take everything else. Diminished Bledisloe interest is more down to the Wallabies not being competitive.
pjm
Roar Rookie
Except Origin used to be The Best Vs. The Best, talked about being better than internationals. Now internationals are catching up fast and most of the best players in the NRL can't play Origin. The quality will decrease and so will it's lustre.
code 13
Roar Guru
Why would the kiwis be any less match fit when they are selected from the same NRL comp? Feel free to point out where I said that. I said Australia has a bigger player pool so when they’re coming off 5-8 weeks of intense NRL competition and have to put a test squad together they usually have the benefit of picking last year’s Origin/Kangaroos combinations that have been proven and up to match fitness but without being fatigued from Origin. That combined with the fact that only 2 of the Anzac tests have been played in New Zealand is a massive advantage. 7 years ago New Zealand threatened pulling out of the mid-season test altogether because of this. They want extended camps, just like the Origin camps. It's widely accepted that longer camps result in better performance. Arguing otherwise is ridiculous.