I suspect there isn't enough money in the game to expand aggressively.
Full time requires cash. League is a relatively poor sport - mainly down to a poorly supported international scene. A vicious circle....

Hmm...i would say some of that world cup profit would be useful for this but a lot of that has probably been spent! (on useful things of course)

It'll still be peanuts compared to what Twickenham churns in every 6 Nations tournament/Autumn internationals.

Plus the RFU own the stadium, so it's all clear profit. NRL/RFL have to borrow stadia....

The IRB is substantially wealthier than the RLIF.

And let's not forget what the 2000 world cup did (or didn't....)

Rugby Union is rich? Strange, you never mentioned it.



X-Factor has unrivalled media coverage and generates millions. This makes it the best music show on tv.

'The mighty Lebanon' are indeed not in this competition Mr Jones. Are the mighty Namibia, Portugal, Canada or the Ivory Coast (have all played in RU World Cups) taking part in any games this Autumn?

73,000 + in 1992 at Wembley is what we need to get back to...

Not that far at all really. Just treating the international game with respect.

It is about exposure and correcting the misinformation spread by the likes of Jones.

Just to expand, only someone with no idea whatsoever would claim only Australia - GB matters in rugby league after that superb World Cup Final before a sell-out crowd last year...

The RLWC resides in Auckland after all.

Something union certainly ain't crowing about.

The likes of Jones fear rugby league because they realise it has massive implications for the structure of their sport. We have evolved as a code of rugby, they haven't but realise they need to.

Read between the lines some of you people.

some of the people talking up union on this thread are simply hilarious.

union lies or exaggerates its level of popularity.

its a minor sport in every nation it is played in bar NZ, small bits of england, SA and the south of france.

it relies upon hooray henry fans that turn out 3 or 4 times a year to go to internationals to cover apathy for club games.

with all the media the game gets in england, the collapse in crowds for many GP clubs is really funny.

the game is on its deathbead in australia, declining in NZ too.

the way NZ many NZ commentators have all said the NRL is a far better product tells you the dire future for the game

do they stick with the status quo and become more a marginal sport or admit they were wrong all along and copy RL.

Union is bigger and has more money. This has always been the case.

Jones is paid handsomely to write about the sport 'he loves'.

Yet for decades he writes sneery, nasty & bile filled articles about RL. Our game is an itch that poor old Jones cannot scratch. Our existence irritates the hell out of Jones and his like. RL will not go away, it will not lie down.

Our game will out live Jones, poor boke.

He'll be fertilising the grass while the great game marches on.

114 years this year...

How old is the moron Jones?

Bigger and more money? Bull. More exposure and more misinformation is closer to the point.

How many 90,000+ crowds has union had in London?

Rugby league has had many...

See - we can marginalise as well.

And where would the money go if we sold out stadiums for all internationals, you can bet the SL clubs would be wanting 'fees' for their players involved. RL does not have a good track record at sharing the spoils (look at the SL money, which could have benefitted all clubs) with the top clubs having that greed factor and a couldn't care less attitude towards the lower clubs.

All too true sadly.

Having read through the good points made in this thread I wonder what people think the crowd would be if the RFL announced a Great Britain V Australia 3 match test series next autumn wiith the 1st match at, say the millenium stadium, 2nd at Elland Road and 3rd at Man City.

I reckon the crowds would be massive as the hunger to get a Great Britain side back playing in an ashes series is huge.

When it comes to RL Stephen Jones knows about enough to fill the back of a postage stamp folded in half, he's not even particularly highly rated by many RU fans, and he is actually supposed to know about that. He takes a couple of cheap shots that might amuse some of his core readership, fair enough, it's not as if he's actually going spend the time understanding the challenges RL faces in any depth, it's not his job, besides he's just filling some column inches and anybody whose seen some of the RU premiership games this season will know it's probably better than writing about that.

Too true, my payment would be winging its way for all three the day they were announced. Cannot get the same motivation for England v Wales I'm afraid.

GB are effectively England though...why kid yourself otherwise? When we have a few Welsh (ie not parental) or Irish or Scottish wanting to play, it might be an issue but apart from Brian Carney, every GB player has been English for ages, so what's the issue in the name?

FFS, they could be called GB this year and still have the same players!

I think its more down to playing for the ashes than which players are playing

Well they never played for that every year, so what about the intervening years? FWIW I think they should stick with the 4 year cycle for the Ashes but they played many of these series as [iEngland[/i in the past too...so what's the big deal really?

AFAIK the Ashes have never been contested by England.

GB was only invented in 1954 wasn't it? Were England v Australia series before that not for the Ashes?

Quote ="tb"GB was only invented in 1954 wasn't it? Were England v Australia series before that not for the Ashes?'" They've had a variety of names, Lions, Northern Union etc, but England wasn't one of them. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ashes_(rugby_league)

Quote ="tb"GB was only invented in 1954 wasn't it? Were England v Australia series before that not for the Ashes?'" They've had a variety of names, Lions, Northern Union etc, but England wasn't one of them. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ashes_(rugby_league)

Quote ="Kelvin's Ferret"They've had a variety of names, Lions, Northern Union etc, but England wasn't one of them. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ashes_(rugby_league)'" Quote ="your link"In 1928, the City Tattersalls Club in Sydney, Australia donated a trophy to be the prize, the "Ashes Cup".[1 The Cup's inscription reads:[1 INTERNATIONAL RUGBY LEAGUE FOOTBALL Australia v England (THE ASHES) Presented by CITY TATTERSALLS CLUB'"

Quote ="Kelvin's Ferret"They've had a variety of names, Lions, Northern Union etc, but England wasn't one of them. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ashes_(rugby_league)'" Quote ="your link"In 1928, the City Tattersalls Club in Sydney, Australia donated a trophy to be the prize, the "Ashes Cup".[1 The Cup's inscription reads:[1 INTERNATIONAL RUGBY LEAGUE FOOTBALL Australia v England (THE ASHES) Presented by CITY TATTERSALLS CLUB'"

Quote ="tb"icon_wink.gif'" Oh … and this www.castigers.com/images/gold/ar ... kinson.jpg certainly looks like an England shirt (from 1929-30, an Ashes series) even if Wiki lists the home team as The Lions (GB) (even though as we know, the GB team didn't come into play until 54). But that's Wiki for you.

Quote ="tb"icon_wink.gif'" Oh … and this www.castigers.com/images/gold/ar ... kinson.jpg certainly looks like an England shirt (from 1929-30, an Ashes series) even if Wiki lists the home team as The Lions (GB) (even though as we know, the GB team didn't come into play until 54). But that's Wiki for you.

1948 actually, according to [urlhttp://www2.hunterlink.net.au/~maajjs/tests.htm[/url.