Grand idea....hopefully there are some backers to it....as I can't see it happening if left to the RFL and ARL. Would probably be the best chance and idea out there at present (or in the past) to get the game at an international stage expanded....thing is though, could you take then being the 4th best team in the world?? As America will no doubt overtake us rapidly if it caught on over there!!!

I think the point is that Ice Hockey is probably the fastest team sport and it's popular in the States.

What... 5 tackles and a kick?

I've recently come back from the USA. In fact I'm off to live and work there in January.

If anything gridiron (boring though it may be) seems more complicated than footy is.


I'm not sure footy will ever make much of an impact in the US. If its not Nascar, baseball, ice hockey or NFL they arent really that interested.

Russell Crowe might create a bit of interest.. but I don't think those Seppos will be deserting the superbowl to go along and watch it

I'm not trying to be condescending but I'm actually struggling to understand this post. Are you trying to suggest that I personally believe that fans are in charge of the game? If so that's one of the strangest things I have ever seen posted, there's no point in even trying to argue against that as it just makes no sense whatsoever.

I don't think anyone thinks they will and I don't think anyone has that as an aim.
If RL could get 5-10,0000 crowds for club games in the USA then it would be enough to pay players full time and give them a career option. No-one expects SL to get Premier League sized crowds, and likewise for the AMNRL.

Where will it fit in? there's no room for any more tournaments, a one-off game yes but a multi-team tournament?? Origin makes mid-season impossible, 4 nations and world cup makes end of season impossible.

Internationals need to go mid season where clubs release players. Just the way it is.
Put the game before club loyalties, the RLIF should grow a backbone and do what's right

I agree but Origin makes that impossible. SLE and NZ could do it, but not if we want Australia involved. Actually that could be quite good. NZ, England, France, Wales mid-season every year. End of season club Champions League. Play the Aussies in world cups and one-off games only.

Easy, rearrange the international calendar. At the moment we have a year where no or very little international Rl is being played, 2012.

On a four year cycle after 2013 have the following events at the end of the season. (IIRC from the next WC it will be on a four year cycle, five years this time as not to avoid with other events in 2012.)

2014: Four Nations (Australia/NZ)
2015: World Club Challenge based in Las Vegas (or other international city), as per Russell Crowe's idea.
2016: Four Nations (UK/France)
2017: Rugby League World Cup

Have the Four Nations every two years alternating between UK and Australasia as it is now, and theres your four year cycle culminating in the World Cup.

As for the format, starting with the winners of the 2012, 13, 14, 15 NRl and SL Grand Finals they will compete in two groups of four, plus semi finals followed by a final.

Where a team wins their GF more than once, that years entry spot becomes available to the other finalists within the four year cycle. If two teams are making regular appearances in Grand Finals then priority of places is given to other finalists within that four year cycle, then to the highest placed semi finalists based on final league positions in the final year. (Small chance of both semi finalists qualifying but possible if the previous four GF were contested by the same teams.)

If there are two finalists who didn't win the GF fighting for one place in a given year, then the most recent finalist qualifies.

For example, if we had had a WCC in 2010 then the English teams competing would qualify as follows:
2007: Leeds (Won the Grand Final)
2008: St Helens (as finalists)
2009: Wigan (as highest placed semi finalists)
2010: Huddersfield (as highest placed semi finalists who hadn't already qualified)

Like wise in the NRL:
2007: Manly (as finalists due to Melbourne's title being stripped)
2008:Melbourne* (as finalists)
2009: Parramatta (as finalists)
2010: St George Illawarra (as winners)

[size=50*- As far as I'm aware Melbourne weren't stripped of their runners up spot, only the titles they won. They would still technically qualify as finalists, otherwise Cronulla would take their place.[/size

Here's how I think it would be run, each respective comp get's wound back to 22 games then they play their final series, two weeks later WCC tourny starts and then the 4 Nations/World Cup

Or... you could always take the 4N to america. TV deal would be peanuts but enough for RL.
Not saying we should do that but its an alternative idea, I think the US public could get behind countries better than clubs they'venever heard of. Have the Atlantic cup games played pre match

A full 12 months rugby league. I like your thinking.

What, like what happened with Oz?

I think 3k crowds would do it.

The TV contracts the most important thing.
I read in the USA there's hundreds of sports trying to go pro with leagues all after the same spot really, even though, a tv contract to set up rugby league would be small fry to those companies

I think while the IRB continue to make great strides the key for RL to catch up is to crack America or China. I have no idea how RL would be able to crack China unless RL cracks America first. With an effort to do this RL could use it as an opportunity to transform how the game is structured.

First off, expand SLE to two conferences of 12, teams play those in their conf H&A, top four teams from each making a straight forward knock out P/Os for the SL title. Creating more places, creates more space for your Fax' and your Fev's as well as expansion clubs like Barca and Dublin. It also reduces the amount of matches players play. Also, makes more room for WCC. Yes there would be an overall drop in playing standards initially, but top end clubs would remain high and standards should raise over time. It could mean less TV money for clubs, but, personally, I think too many clubs are too reliant on Sky money for revenues (it would force them to do more) and if there is greater national and international presence there is no reason why we shouldn't get greater sums of money anyway, particularly with greater presnce in the US market. This also gives your Fev's et al a chance to prove they are competitive as businesses as well on-field even though they are small and questions raised as to whether they can ever be able to compete at the top end.

Then put in place a meaningful WCC challenge; NRL finalists, SL champs, CC champs and then two US rep sides; East (Stars), West (Stripes). Two round robins, playing in respective side of US (East or West), with winners playing in final at a venue in the middle; Denver, Vegas, Texas. Would have thought US TV$ would only really be involved if US compete. Part of $ could be put towards picking up players who miss out on NFL Draft to bolster strength, steer players away from NFL with contracts that include personal sponsorship and marketing deals or put into their governing body's structure.

After that have an annual 4N's without Oz, only play them at WC. 4N's between Eng, NZ, Wales, France, PNG. Where in world held dictates who gets automatic entry, others play for positions, like PNG/Wales have done. Euro/Oceania nations could play each other mid-season, Tour matches and final after WCC.

This could help towards RLIF board restructure; England, Wales, France, NZ, PNG, OZ, USA get two reps and Scots, Ireland, Samoa, Tonga, Canada etc get one. For example anyway. This moves away from Lewis having to fight against two ARL reps and one NZRL rep and is more inclusive of more nations. More Board members making key decisions also means less likelihood of corruption, as some may suggest we've seen with the 22 FIFA officials.

This will never happen. There isn't the money. Unfortunately it is a massive pipe-dream.

You need to be a hell of a lot more realistic.

Ah well, it was fun typing it up