- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Roar Rookie
Joined August 2018
0
Views
0
Published
7
Comments
Published
Comments
It’s probably coincidence, but off the back of the heritage player (i.e. Fifita) success in RL there has definitely been a more obvious effort to develop RU in the Islands of late. World Rugby has already been channeling many millions into high performance player programs. But just last month both Fiji and Samoa gained voting rights on the World Rugby council.
On top of that Fiji Drua won the Australian NRC and there is strong talk of a fully professional Pacific Island side in either Andrew Forrest’s Rapid Rugby comp or in Super Rugby.
If/when Samoa and Tonga can sort their governance and create sustainable high performance pathways (similar to the Drua) there will start to be a more steady flow of professional quality players to Europe and those national teams will improve.
However I don’t believe Rugby League ‘genuinely’ wants to grow the international game in a similar fashion. What most fans generally seem to want is more athletes in the NRL/Origin (or Super League). But those players are typically from Australia and while some success can breed attention there needs to be investment in the Pacific Islands to create competitions and high performance pathways.
The other issue is that if the NRL ever feels threatened or hindered by International RL they’ll simply tell players to stop playing tests or forgo their NRL contract. The only reason Taumalolo can afford to play for Tonga is because he earns so much for North Queensland. At present the NRL is somewhat accomadating of Int RL, as a means to generate more revenue in the calendar. But if their primary revenue sources (NRL, Origin) are threatened then it’ll be lights out for Tonga without a ball being kicked.
Is rugby league's window of opportunity in the Pacific beginning to close?
Thanks for the article JS.
Not sure if anyone else noticed, but sitting smack in front of Eddie Jones for the England vs All Blacks match was none other than Craig Bellamy!
So maybe someone has already considered acquiring the advice of a successful Rugby League coach to help with modern tactics. Or possible he was just enjoying the spectacle at his own request to do some research.
Certainly there are a lot of tactics from RL in RU these days, although I’m surprised no one has bothered to do the opposite. RL is ripe for teams pushing in scrums, lifting jumpers, short kick-offs (line drop-outs) 3 man attacking pods with double man carries and gain line back door runners. It just seems that while the sport of RL has evolved, it’s generally in the direction of conservatism and defensiveness. Which I guess is also currently where RU is heading.
I’ve also noticed that a lot of NH teams are putting two jackals of the tackle now, as it makes the conventional clean-out harder to effect. One jackler often protects the other. Great innovation, but mostly on the defensive side of the ball.
The big risk for teams like Ireland is when you’ve trimmed out all the fat and created a low risk style of play, where do you go from there?
Has running rugby had its day?
Is it ironic that the Rugby Union award takes into account both International and Domestic performance (like what the Golden Boot used to be)? Instead the new criteria has just undermined the value of the award, rather than adding value to the International game.
Confessions of a dreamer: I voted for Tommy Makinson
The issue is that the current growth is still barely skin deep. Very little effort or investment is being made to increase participation and grow the grassroots. All we’re seeing is players born, raised, groomed and paid via the NRL (and to a much lesser extent ESL) playing for a variety of heritage nations when convenient. All this celebrates is the multi-cultural nature of the modern world, primarily Australia, but not genuine growth in Rugby
league.
Toronto are a bunch of Englishmen and Tonga are a primarily bunch of Aussies and Kiwis. There is a very high risk that both of these examples are bubbles waiting to burst. For example, all it takes is for the ARL to get sick of the players they’re paying and developing coming back to beat them to put some kind of restriction on foreigners in the NRL. And if Toronto fail to get promoted again, how long before the money dries up. For Rugby League to actually grow they need more players from more locations, not the same number of players from the same countries playing for a wider array of heritage nations and expansion franchises.
England isolated as international rugby league surges in the southern hemisphere
Surely anything that essentially repeats the basic World Cup premise will devalue the novelty of the actual World Cup, robbing Peter to pay Paul.
I just think they should change nothing EXCEPT that all tests for the 2 years after the World Cup are used to determine who qualifies for the next one. Not just the seedings for each pool but fundamental qualification itself. For everyone, except the host nation.
That keeps things stable but makes all matches mean something by channeling the prestige of the World Cup, not by usurping it.
Failing that we should move to a European Cup and a Continental Cup for everyone else in between World Cups. The big guns can use it for grooming younger players against the minnows and the minnows get exposure to T1 opponents.
League of Nations is an idea worth discussing, but…
Best concept I’ve heard in regards the ‘World League’ idea was to instead remove the current automatic qualification for world cups. Then make every team qualify properly for the next WC via the current test match schedule (except the WC hosts). This uses the prestige of the World Cup to make every test match mean something.
Currently the tests count towards rankings which can impact pools, but they certainly don’t hold the same importance as outright qualification
So maybe the 2016 rugby championship winner and 6 nations winners qualify. Then same with 2017, with qualification going to the runners up if the same winners occur. Or the 3 match test series in June determine which teams will go through, same as November. The whole test schedule could be set up to make games more meaningful but without duplicating the World Cup and instead aligning with it.
World Rugby exploring brand new 'league of nations' tournament
In this day and age the biggest factor holding back the growth of game is that it’s a contact sport. The top 10 shows it is very uncommon for a contact sport to be universally popular, probably because participants (past and present) of a sport tend to also be the biggest fans.
What Rugby does have in its favour is the priority given to international competition. This is where American Football, by comparison struggles. Great domestic attention and high salaries, but next to zero international competition of meaning.
The ability for Rugby to stage an entertaining World Cup, with meritocratic pools and genuinely competitive matches involving nations from all continents is a huge competitive advantage. As is the historic heritage of the sport being primarily about amateur participation. Rugby League, by comparison, has historically focused efforts on growing a small number of domestic competitions for the professional exploitation of the game for profit. Not a good way to increase global exposure.
Too many players, too complex and not enough stars of the Lomu variety