B2B means back to back.

Every game is on tv. If you know where to look. www.premiersports.com/rugby-league/4-nations/

Every game is on tv. If you know where to look. www.premiersports.com/rugby-league/4-nations/

Yeah but i'm not buying Premier sports to watch a few games.

Rugby Union would have every game shown. Why don't we? oh yeah, Because the BBC say no and the RFL says 'Oh ok, well thank you anyway. Sorry for asking'.

They talk about wanting to expand the international game but go along with minimal exposure... on national TV, its barmy.

Will there be any alternatives on the red button ?

PM me & I'll send you a naughty link

Though it pains me to say it, rugby union fans are guaranteed to pack out Twickenham for every single test. RL fans are so tight and small-minded that we see filling Huddersfield as an achievement. Perhaps when the fans invest in the international game, the media and sponsors will follow suit?

Or, we can carry on feeling sorry for ourselves.

Thanks mate appreciated

Hoping that the four nations gets a better broadcast budget than the warm up game?!

But I'm actually quite excited about this 4 nations teams are at full strength barring one or two but the replacements are equal in ability and we are not a weaker side for them not being in the team!!

Selling out Int RL isn't the fault of the fans!
Its down to format stability over a prolonged period, marketing and effective pricing. Consumer interest and confidence in the product will be grow with that in place.

What papers haven't you been reading?
Int RL gets more column inches than the domestic game gets in total each press.

If the format continues it'll become a part of the RL calendar we as fans will make an event, as we have domestically with new Wembley, the GF, Perpignan and the Magic weekenders.

We can only blame the RL bodies for letting down the international growth ot the sport by pulling the plug on tests for a generation not the fans or media.

It's not all the fans fault, BUT how many fans would prefer to see their club play in an SL match verses an international?
I've been to a couple of RU Home Nations matches and being in a full stadium with a close fought contest and a 50/50 fans split is a really good experience - even if the quality of play and slow slow ball is boring.
I'm going to the Olympic Stadium and Coventry (and have purchase top price tickets) as they are close enough to me, but I'll watch the rest either on the Beeb or the web for nowt. Logistics show we can't have a 50/50 split.
The international game is really important for RL but until they run stable comps, like RU, it'll be on the back foot on the international stage.

RU has a strong international format that it has developed over many decades, and going professional at club level has helped enormously.
The thing RU has though is a lot more political in-fighting between the clubs and the authorities.

Ignoring the hooray henries (and that anti-League BBC commentator Ian Robertson), I do struggle with RU because most of it's so slow. There are skilled players but the skill is different to that in league.

Give me RL anyday (except the best try ever which I mentioned a few days ago - Gareth Edwards 1973 All Blacks v Barbarians - but I have to admit the Mark Coyne try in the SOO was phenomenal, as pointed out by an RL fan!)
The commentary on the Beeb for the Edwards try was sublime - that really adds to it.

Unfortunately,one of the worst things that happened to our game was when RU turned professional.

Perhaps it didn't do us too many favors but it was up to the NRL and RFL to keep our own house in order.
They let down by dropping the tests and World Cup.
RL had a real grip in Wales on the late 90's to kick on, we let that go down the swanny. More recently, about a decade ago, Ireland gripped the country, the RFL chose not to develop further or even play the odd final there pre Wembley completion.

Ironic, isn't it, the one thing they were against for so long, and indeed the reason for the split, was to be something that marginalised us a lot more

Indeed it is ironic & when you look at both codes the management in RU are more professional & better connected than our bods, & the sponsorship is by worldwide brands. Hopefully Roger Draper may benefit the game as a whole now he's at the RFL.

The management of the RU has had loads of problems over the years. In fact it has been shambolic at times. You cannot just blame RL management. Watching the National Anthems last night (Scot v Aus) and comparing what would happen at Murrayfield would tell you something. We just have not got the fan base apart from a very small area. It is much to simple/easy to blame those at the top.

RL is a passionately supported regional sport, that's it.

Lomax my scapegoat.

It's will soon be Watkins when you realise you're not singing him. But bless you for believing!

I thought England looked stronger in both attack & defence when Hill & Graham were on the field together. There seemed to be less organisation when they were off.

I thought Lomax played well & very pleased for McGillivray.

Watching the NZ game it's hard to get round how our crowd just doesn't seem to get whipped up with supporting our England Team. It's as if we are watching and exhibition match. But if England were playing NZ at Rugby Union they'd lap up scrum after line out after ruck etc. in a frenzy and they'd seem to enjoy every minute.

I don't know the answer by the way.

I think what is noticeable in RL games is the lack of crowd close ups. Compare that to international RU games where almost as many shots are shown of the fans as of the game ,probably to deflect from the lack of activity on the pitch.

Yes crowd shots at common following kicks for position.

Same old story I'm afraid. So close yet so far.

Lomax had a good game apart from the one on one tackle that cost us a try.

I thought Sarginson was poor tbh. Got pulled in for the first try and bombed a try of his own.
Watkins didn't seem to do a lot either to be honest.

The Burgess twins made a few mistakes when they came on, and the Kiwis seemed to handle them reasonably well.

Magillvray had a good match and Hall did a fair amount.
I was impressed by Elliot.

Gale seemed to drift in and out a bit, and Widdop did a little too. Neither anywhere near the Johnson, but then very few are.

Hill and Graham were great as was Hodgeson. His kicking was very very good and he ran to the line well. I can see why he's a hit in Oz. Never thought too much of him when here to be honest, but he's improved vastly.
I'd have used Clark differently. I'd have brought him on in the 1st half for the last 10 or so minutes. Don't think we saw the best of him, but he did nothing wrong in particular.
Cooper had a solid game, and it looks good for us next year on that front.

Their number 13 was immense and their bench (Tapau ?) was really good too.

I'm sure lots will have different views and I've only seen it the once, so may have a different view if I watch it again.

Well we know for sure now, England will not beat Australia with the same team.
Our only chance of a complete change in attack is to utilise Ratchford. Even then it'll be slim, but as it is now, it's impossible.