Another possibility could be to play a Scotland game (say v Ireland) IN Scotland if sales to locals for MM is on the increase by 2013.



Scotland v Ireland at Easter Road or Tynecastle could be a good draw.

So we've gone from places like Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Newcastle.....to Halifax?



How the **** is that good?





And 1992 ans 1995 was an age ago. A large scale competition requires so much more than either of those competitions had.



And by the way....you want to just forget about what happened in 2000?





The ARL and NZRL have only just come out of the "We have to go to England at the end of the year to help them pay off their 2000 World Cup debt" era!





As for swapping France for PNG.....why? France were diabolical and now they are coached by a bloke with more teeth and IQ points...and he hasnt even got many teeth left!





Basicaly, we're f*cked. The concept of a Rugby League World Cup is dead.

The only reason PNG were put in with the big three was because the tournament was in Oz. Therefore put France in there when in England (ala the 4 nations).

Didn't you say that before the last world cup?

I seem to remember Herr Freak being a big doubter prior to the WC last year as well....



Anyway, the whole point of a World Cup is that it is a WORLD CUP, not some event that stays in Aus all the time. Whilst the NRL may be bigger and beter than SL, SL is the only other pro comp in the world, and probably it will always remain that way.



BTW the Wallabies get big crowds for games against showers of sh*te like Italy as do the other major RU nations, so don't bang the usual rubbish about 'competitiveness' being the only thing that brings crowds in.

We need big sponsorship - corporate freebies brings in big crowds and that only comes with sponsorship. RL as we know IS a big draw in Oz, here it's still very much a minority sport. I'm excited about the prospect of it being a success but very worried that it won't be and the effect that will have on our game.

a lot of people are suggesting using in the region of 20 destinations to hold games. i think that would be a mistake and it would just end up bein a mess like the 2000 tournament which had 25 odd destinations? the footballe world cup only ever uses about 10-12 host cities and thats for a 32 team tournament. for a 12 team RL tournament i'd use 8-10 host cities max with each place hosting at least 2 games so that the community in those places can properly get behind the comp. I'd use:



Saints new stadium

DW stadium

KC stadium

Headingly

Stoop

One out of huddersfield, castleford or wakey stadium

Cardiff

Old Trafford (for double header opening two games and double header semis)

Wembley (for final alone but it has to be sold out in advance!)

this will great when we play STATE OF ORIGIN @ the new wembley.and the new olympic stadium

Its going to be a 12 team tournament so im not sure how they could make the super pool work again. Id go for 4 groups of 3 teams top 2 go to quarter finals, bottom team play in a plate competition.



France, Wales, Scotland and Ireland should play their pool matches at home. Keep the rest of the games in the heartlands with a decent pool game at the stoop and the final at wembley.



It really needs to be on the bbc, been on sky is going to do nothing for raising the profile of the game.

In Dubai?





Why not play it in Canada lol?

Think you find thats where a soccer teams plays out of. Ar$e something or other!









By the way the super group idea was fantastic and hopefully its used again. I'd like to only see the top two teams from the 4 get atuomatic rides to the semi's with possibly third place having to play off to continue in the competition.

The RFL need to realise two things:



1) The only games that will get good ticket sales are the England games, and the semis/final.



2) Hosting the majority of the games in small northern towns will do nothing to increase the popularity of the game. Especially if they are held in crapp stadiums.



I'm not saying that games should be plonked in any old place like in 2000, but the RFL should seriously consider where it wants the game to go. Holding the pool games of the home nations in their own countries is a must. Also, the only games that should be played at the smaller venues, such as the KC, the Pharm etc are the ones that wont normally get a crowd but because they are RL hotbeds more will turn up if they dont get many games. Here is what my tourne would look like (using the top 12 teams from last time as an example of what the groups would look like):



England (host)

PNG

Tonga



Ireland (host)

France

Samoa



Scotland (host)

Australia

Lebanon



Wales (host)

New Zealand

Fiji



Pool games:

England vs Tonga (Stamford Bridge/White Hart Lane/Olyimpic Stadium/similar sized London ground)

PNG vs Tonga (KC Stadium)

England vs PNG (COM Stadium)



Ireland vs France (Munsters ground)

France vs Samoa (DW)

Ireland vs Samoa (a ground in Dublin, my knowledge of Irish grounds isnt that good though)



Scotland vs Australia (Hearts/Hibs ground)

Australia vs Lebanon (Galpharm)

Scotland vs Lebanon (Motherwells ground (would have preferred Glasgow but there isnt any grounds holding around 20k there iirc))



Wales vs New Zealand (Cardiff Citys new ground)

New Zealand vs Fiji (Meadow Lane(test the water for Midlands and not too far from South Yorkshire))

Wales vs Fiji (Liverty Stadium in Swansea)



Semi Finals:

Group one winner vs Group four winner (Elland Road)

Group two winner vs Group three winner (Anfield)



Final (Wembley)

I just struggle to see the point of a RL World Cup as it stands. The sport just doesn't have the national footprint to get anything more than 4 or 5 thousand attendances for any of the games.



The logical thing is to withdraw to the heartlands and play all the games there. Sure the crowds would be a few thousand higher, but what is the point of that?

I'm also suprised that after 6 pages, no one has mentioned that the PM mentioned the fact he is pleased the RLWC is coming to the UK. Or is it too embarrasing to be linked with him?