In terms of linguistics, the Papuans have little in common with each other FWIW. There are hundreds of Papuan languages and they are often unrelated to each other. FWIW I understand that some parts of Papua are Melanesian like the Fiji.

Though tbh I think it depends on on field results. The RU equivalent seemed a goer at first but poor results seemed to take the impetus out of it.

If they do well then it could be like Europe at the Ryder Cup. There is no such country as "Europe" and yet they play the USA.

Oh purleeease. I was at the 08 WC and saw those sides, none of whom could beat England. Sometimes we take the "woe is me, aren't England awful" schtick a bit too far folks. We're the 3rd best side in the world by quite a distance, and beat the Kiwis only a year ago in a competitive match they needed to win to make a final. Let's keep a little perspective here.

There are thousands of languages on the island. A few years ago the figure was estimate to be somewhere around 5,000.
I think it would be much better to consult the people themselves rather than have a few Aussies in a Sydney board room decide they'll play under the banner of Pacific Nations or Pacific Islanders. As I said earlier, I get the feeling this will turn out to be a non-story but it does create some interesting debate.
I for one hope we don't go down the Ryder Cup route as I think a two team international competition would be repetitive, exclusionist and ultimately a poor draw for neutrals.

i take on board everything you've said there,but imo RL needs to grow quickly at international level.
if you've got six nations who are crap on there own and no one is interested in watching, but they've got a few decent players each,then why not combine these players and let them play each other in a proper series,its not long term is it ?

I'd rather a three-match series against the Kiwis. Let France, Wales and the rest play the likes of Samoa and PNG as they warm up for 2013.

Yes to all of those. None of those teams exist in RL and for good reason. It's a pathetic and horrible idea and will hopefully never see the light of day.

Australian officials want to give the players a summer off after three consecutive Four Nations since the last World Cup in 2008.





Rugby league needs its heartland areas to stand up and be counted, not hide away in the shadows. The international game can't afford to lose a team like Australia. This isn't football where you have loads of famous teams. Brazil could pull out of the football world cup but you'd still have Argentina, Spain, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, England, etc. It would be a blow but the show would go on without too much trouble.

Rugby league has Australia, New Zealand and England, plus some up and coming nations. I don't mind us playing the developing teams but most of all I want to see us playing the Kangaroos and Kiwis. It's bad enough that we don't play them at home every year as it is.

I like rugby league as much as I like rugby union, but I probably watch (albeit on tv) 20 rugby union games for every 1 rugby league game I watch. RL can certainly produce the quality (as we saw on Sat) but it has to somehow try and increase the supply.

so you dont want us to follow the best ideas that RU use to make loads of money out of, do you not ?

No, because they are stupid ideas. RU has a better international scene which makes more money because they had administrators who were proactive in their expansion of their game in the 1980s and had the financial backing to support this. They were not insular and were not resistant and dismissive of change, they have an organised and motivated world governing body and they are now reaping the rewards. Contrast this with RL where we have fans who are completely resistant towards and actually wish failure on any attempts at expansion, and an international game that is run at the highest level by crooked Australians who wouldn't know what genuine international sport was if it hit them in the face. That's the reason we don't have an international scene like RU. Adopting pathetic contrived gimmick sides would achieve nothing.

the brilliant thing about this move is it takes away from australian control of the game

aussie players say they dont want internationals in 2012, england and nz say we do so well carry on without you

thats quite positive for the development of int. rl leaving australia out in the cold like that

england and nz can get some much needed practice in for the world cup plus with nz the number 1 side in the world its not as if it wont have a draw piece

England, Wales, France, NZ in the UK would be a tournament that would at least cover costs, particularly if England or Wales make the final.

If NZ think they can repeat the crowds they got this time round, then NZ, England, PNG + 1 from Wales, France, Samoa, Tonga would also be credible and (at least) pay for itself.

I suppose the alternative would be a 3-match England/NZ series, in either country.

And we could use "best in the world" Aussie neutral refs for every game.

[iMeanwhile, it has emerged that England and New Zealand are considering playing a Four Nations Series without Australia in the lead-up to the 2013 World Cup. There is currently a blank in the international schedule for 2012, when Australian officials want to give the players a summer off after three consecutive Four Nations competitions since the last World Cup in 2008. A Kiwi tour of the UK has been proposed but England and New Zealand believe there could be enough interest to warrant playing a Four Nations without the Kangaroos and may invite Wales and France to make up the numbers. Wales are already assured of a place in the 2011 tournament, courtesy of their victory in this year's European Cup, while France would be confident of drawing big crowds for the visit of England and New Zealand.[/i www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... tlead.html

[iMeanwhile, it has emerged that England and New Zealand are considering playing a Four Nations Series without Australia in the lead-up to the 2013 World Cup. There is currently a blank in the international schedule for 2012, when Australian officials want to give the players a summer off after three consecutive Four Nations competitions since the last World Cup in 2008. A Kiwi tour of the UK has been proposed but England and New Zealand believe there could be enough interest to warrant playing a Four Nations without the Kangaroos and may invite Wales and France to make up the numbers. Wales are already assured of a place in the 2011 tournament, courtesy of their victory in this year's European Cup, while France would be confident of drawing big crowds for the visit of England and New Zealand.[/i www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... tlead.html

Easy. One off Test v PNG in Port Moresby and a 3 Test series v NZ for the Baskerville Shield. Maybe a warm-up game v Tonga or Samoa too.

Why not have a World Series?

Have Tonga, Samoa, NZ, England, France and Wales playing each other over 3 weeks at various stadiums, three games per day?

They might want a rest too!

Please stop

I'd ahve a 3 match series in NZ. Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch. 25K at every game, decent earner and toughens both sides u ready for the WC. Have Tonga v Samoa v PNG as an undercard

Why do we worry about Australia & NZ beating the lesser teams. In the other code Scotland have never beaten the All blacks in thier history still the crowds turn up just in case they might. Australia could never beat GB in league untill thirty years ago now its the other way round. At least Union sticks with teams & gives them a go ie Italy & Argentina League should do the same.

from a purely selfish england point of view think we should tour NZ,3 games against NZ and a couple of warm up games against samoa & tonga to prep us for the world cup...

Over what time period roughyed?

5 week..

Week 1 - Samoa vs New Zealand, Tonga vs England
Week 2 - Tonga vs New Zealand, Samoa vs England
Week 3 - Tonga vs Samoa, New Zealand vs England 1st Test
Week 4 - Samoa vs Tonga, New Zealand vs England 2nd Test
Week 5 - New Zealand vs England 3rd Test

Would Fiji, the semi finalists from the World Cup, seriously agree to this?


But if we're going to have a Pacific Island team, then we need clear cut pathways for developing players. This means the following for any Pacific Islander:

Top level: Representing Pacific Island team.
2nd level: Representing home country in 5/6 nation league. (Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, Cook Islands and the rest maybe. Include PNG at a push)
3rd level: Representing club in country's own domestic league pyramid.

The idea stinks of a concept similar to West Indies cricket, and they hold a domestic competition involving Caribbean nations. You cannot expect players to make the jump from Fijian, Tongan or Samoan domestic rugby league and then compete internationally against Australia, New Zealand and England for a PI rep side. They need that stepping stone representing Fiji, Tonga or Samoa etc in order to develop and compete at a much higher level.

But the Pacific Islanders are a passionate lot. Would they take RL seriously when their national team is in a second tier competition, not even taken seriously internationally? With the nations having been granted independence less than 50 years ago, I doubt they like to be forced into a merger with other nations, even on a sporting level.

Overall its a stupid idea. But the head of the RLIF is an Aussie, and allow their media to write the rulebook for them. So please, for the love of God, if this ridiculous idea goes ahead then we need a sustainable development pathway.

we are'nt going to have a pacific team so don't worry about it

Bingo!