Despite what you may think of RU you have to admire the crowds they pull in for internationals. I've been to Wallabies games and I've struggled to get tickets. I've gone to Kangaroos matches and just been a 'walk up' on the day... and got tickets without any problems at all.

A lot of people don't like the Super 14 Rugby union tournament. I quite enjoy it personally.

If there were more countries playing League COMPETITIVELY I'd like to see a similar concept brought in. Some of you may remember the extended WCC of 1997 (that lost a fortune)

Good concept though... I think if it was brought back now the Gulf between NRL Clubs and SL clubs is not as wide it would be far more competitive.

So, England aren't good enough to play Australia, but Wigan/Saints/Leeds etc are?

The Four Nations helps bring a small RL nation (such as France or PNG) the chance to test themselves against the "big 3" nations. However, for once, I agree with Baz... in that no team outside Aus, Nz or Eng have any chance of winning the tournament.

The Ashes were good in that I like the touring side of it where Aus or NZ would play SL teams in a warm up and it all hinged towards a 3 match series. the 4 Nations doesn't really allow that kind of build up or set of matches.

However, if you removed the 4 nations and replaced it with the tours, either NZ or Aus would miss a season of internationals....other nations wouldn't have the chance to develop their standards. Its a necessary building tool for the next few years in order to build a greater international game.

so 75% of the teams involved have a chance of winning it......sounds like a very competitive comp to me..

I reckon so.

All 3 of those sides have got some good Aussies playing for them.

Any of those sides would give the Kangaroos a good game... especially Wigan

Barrie McKenzie struggling to get something?

I though you was a legend and everything just falls into the palm of your hands at a canter..

I don't think it's actually possible to fall at a canter …

Only 50%



Sounds impressive to say to someone who is unfamilar of the concept of 4 nations RL 'Oh half of the teams involved in the tournament could end up winning'

Until you tell them there are only 4 nations involved.

So, we shouldn't play the 4N because only 2 teams have a chance of winning (in your opinion), but your "logical" replacement is to have an Ashes tour instead involving one of the teams that you have given no chance of winning the 4N (because GB is essentially the same as England) and one of the teams you think will easily win it most years?

I'm sorry, I see no sense in this at all. The logic is lost on me here...

Absolutely.

A Kangaroo tour is about so much more than a simple one off game against England.

A Kangaroo tour is all about arguably the greatest collection of Rugby league players on the planet flying half way round the world to take on the best club sides in England plus the international fixtures against GB or England.

Australia would be confident of winning every game on the tour just like the 'Invincibles' of 1982 did.

Big Club sides over here such as Wigan, St Helens, Hull and Leeds would be determined to make sure that didnt happen... it wouldnt just be the English players in these club sides that would want to beat Australia.. it would be the so called 'past it journeymen' in these clubs who would still believe they had a point to make against their fellow countrymen.

I'm pretty sure Hull v Australia would sell the KC out... as would the other fixtures.


You know it makes sense.

Could that not easily just be said as this:

"Australia flying half way around the world to take on the best international sides"? I don't see why playing a SL side in a friendly is better for the international game than playing an international side in a competitive game?


Well what's the point then? Aren't Australia confident of winning every game all the time anyway?


So a game with "past it players" and English players not good enough for England yet would be better than an international game?


I don't think it would.


It really doesn't.

Look at it this way, a 3-test series is only one game longer than the current 4N tournament anyway (assuming you play in the final). So where is all the extra room in the calendar to play all of these tour games?

I don't like the idea of clubs vs international sides. If a club from SL wants to take on an Aussie side, it should be an NRL side in an extended WCC, not a friendly.

You're talking about how the union lot have a better international recognition, yet you want to reduce the number of international games our rep sides play in?

You know it doesn't make sense.

It makes perfect sense.

Personally I'm getting a bit sick of watching these Australia v England 'tests' ... the only test is whether or not England will keep the Kangaroos under 40 points.

Apart from the occasional victory against Australia, England have failed spectacularly 90% of the time since the 1970's... most importantly when it really matters.

Its getting tedious.

We need to bring back the Kangaroo tours.

The old past it Aussies playing in SL would like nothing better than to put one over the younger ones. Imagine Ogre playing against his old mates. He would love it. As would all the others over here. It would be a good way for coaches to see how younger English players fare against Australia without having to wait until a full blown international. Crowds would be big. Every neutral in the world would want to see Australia lose.

My thinking is that a Kangaroo tour could be played every 3 or 4 years instead of a 4 Nations... which you and I both know is a waste of time. Whats the point of the 4 nations being played here and having a France v Australia game??? France cant even beat England... what chance have they got against the likes of Slater, Inglis, Smith, Gallen and Hayne!

I would love to see an international calendar that had one Northern Hemisphere 4 Nations, one Southern hemisphere 4 Nations, a Kangaroo tour, a GB tour to Australia/NZ and a World Cup every 5 years... now that would be an international programme

The simultaneous seasons we have in the North and South makes these tours pretty unlikely in the future but I have to say that the Kangaroo tours have been the highlight of my last 25 years watching RL and are very much missed

I went to that game (Wed Night match), obtained the autographs of the non playing Kangaroo players - i.e. The Test Team.

They were all stood under the scoreboard eating pies.

So your proposal is to have MORE England/GB vs Aus games?




If Hull KR played Australia, I'd love to see Rovers get smashed personally. I think you'd find the same sort of feeling for the other rivalries in SL.


There's apparently a Lions Tour pencilled in for 2012.

Whilst I enjoy the idea of tours, I think it's ridiculous to suggest scrapping the 4 Nations outright for the return of them. Structured competitions are the future.

If there was a return of tours, I'd like to see them mid-season to compliment the 4N, rather than replace it. If the Kangaroos came over for 6 weeks in June-July time and we had a mid-season Ashes tournament, with tour games etc., that would be best for everyone. 3-4 players out of each NRL team wouldn't be too bad.

The only place a Kangaroo tour could (and should) realistically happen is the slot thats being taken up by the 4 nations.

It couldnt possibly work mid season.

NRL sides wouldnt give up their best players for the best part of 2 months mid season and I imagine SL sides would feel the same

Happens in union, doesn't it?

And you still haven't answered how you'd fit in the extra games?

The tour would start about the same time as the current 4 nations.

Both the NRL and SL seasons would have finished. Id like to see the Kangaroos play a warm up game against Harlequins in London before playing one of the top 3 finishing SL sides. The Kangaroos would play a total of 7 matches (3 club games 3 'tests' as well as the Quins friendly). 7 matches = 7 weeks.

sorted.

lol you've posted some manure on here Barrie but this one is right up there with the best of them!

yeh lets can the only succesful Int tournament we have had for 15 years!

Why not get a job at FIFA then you can bin the soccer WC and just run it for the 6 teams likely to win it.

as someone else said, tool!

The 4 nations is a real success story isn't it.

4 sides.

2 are woeful.


Hardly caught the publics imagination when it was held over here last year... Ordinary crowds, France got flogged by everyone, England got flogged by Australia (twice) and NZ were shown to be one of the most inconsistent sides on the planet.

If thats your idea of a successful tournament god help us.

Socceroos were woeful in the World Cup, doesn't mean there wasn't a point in them being there!

The only way Int RL will ever improve and get respect is

1. Consistent scheduling
2. Regular games for the mid tier teams (ie France and PNG)
3. Some goal for the lower tier teams to aim for
4. A meaningful tournament for the top 3 to test themselves against each other annually
5. Plenty of games for TV to show and media to cover

If the Kangaroos were winning EVERY game by 60 points you might have a point but they aren't and I for one have enjoyed watching the 4 nations and will be spending $000's travelling over East later in the year to watch it live. If there were more RL fans with my attitude and less with yours Int RL would be a lot heathier! Then again maybe its just a NSW thing as Q'land and even Vic seem to enjoy their Int RL?

I know its not exactly the most successful tournement as yet, but its something to build on and its the only way we can improve international RL. Scrapping it would just be giving up on international league. Its something we should continue and hopefully one day included more teams. Try and build up the European and pacific nations tournements aswell. This is the only way international RL will grow.

You cant scrap it simpley because you think only 2 out of 4 teams can win it, exactly how many have a chance of winning the football or rugby union world cup?

You're exactly right. I think the goal has to be that we have a group of internationals that are competitive. Australia, England and NZ already are and with pro rugby in France and Wales they will improve in time and if PNG get a franchise so will they. Then Ireland and Scotland will have pro players who qualify for them. And the NRL and SL make up a lot of Fiji, Samoa and Tonga. And the Pacific cup will help improve these teams develop. I'm for the first time in decades, quite happy with the International RL setup.

if by "lions" you mean england touring NZ or NZ touring here to play england then you can rub out the pencil and permanent marker that sucker down