QuoteCronus="Cronus"You're asking the wrong question. How many of those currently opting for England qualify to opt for Wales, Scotland, Ireland whilst still having the opportunity to play for GB?
Look at the Wales squad from the 1995 World Cup. Ok, lots were RU converts, but many were RL lads who could have opted for England or Wales, and went for their ancestral country. Cunningham, Eyres, Cowie, Atcheson, Harris, Skerrett, Hall, Jones all played for GB and preferred Wales as their home nation. Would they have done that if the GB option hadn't been there?? If England were the only team touring and playing the big boys regularly?? Some, perhaps, but many would have gone for England.
Wrong. Which top-level player will opt for Wales, Scotland or Ireland if England are the only home nation with getting a regular shot at the big-time? Very few. Rhys Evans is the perfect example: as Welsh as they come and opts for England. He might not even make the squad (while his brother is already turning out for Wales) but he prefers to take that chance for the bigger games.
You then get Welsh supporters then saying "we don't want no plastic Taffs" - well make your mind up, you didn't complain in 1995 and there sure as hell isn't the talent in Wales right now to compete. Why not bolster your squad with several higher quality players - everyone benefits.
And looking beyond that, Great Britain is a far bigger brand than 'England RL'. I've never bought an England shirt and never will, they look forced and naff, however a few months ago I tracked down bought a 2001 GB shirt (the Guinness one) because I still love the look and the tradition. I'm not enthused by the 'England RL' brand whereas watching the GB boys had my heart bursting out of my chest. I can name many memorable GB moments but struggle to recall most England results (bar the 2006 Sydney win), simple because I find I'm not that bothered. Oh, I'll watch England but I'm not going to fork out a fortune following them everywhere. That said, I'll be at Salford on Sunday.
The problem has always been that while the logic for removing GB appeared sound at first glance, with a little examination it's heavily flawed.'"
most of what you just said is so one eyed it's just plain stupid
1. please prove that Great britian RL is a far bigger brand than England RL.....i'd bet you a pint that the RFL earns for money from england than they did from GB..
2. aside from getting your memorable wins mixed up lol.....how england beating the reigning world champions in 2009 to make the 4 nations final.....and beating the reigning 4nations champions to make the 2011 4nations final how they are'nt memorable moment just goes to show how blinkered you are...
QuoteCronusLook at the Wales squad from the 1995 World Cup. Ok, lots were RU converts, but many were RL lads who could have opted for England or Wales, and went for their ancestral country. Cunningham, Eyres, Cowie, Atcheson, Harris, Skerrett, Hall, Jones all played for GB and preferred Wales as their home nation. Would they have done that if the GB option hadn't been there?? If England were the only team touring and playing the big boys regularly?? Some, perhaps, but many would have gone for England.'"
introduce the "celtic tigers" and then england won't be the only touring team would they!
bring back GB now and players like brough,mcllorum,evans,bridge,harrison etc will still opt to switch to england because england play in big comps every year! so it would'nt make any difference if they have the chance to play for GB every 4 years!!
having the celtic tigers play in big games every year,against england or playing off v france for 4 nations or going on tours down under...GIVES PLAYERS A REASON TO STICK WITH WALES,SCOTLAND OR IRELAND...
and another thing.......i've yet to hear from anyone official from wales,scotland or ireland support bring back GB...and i doubt we will.
QuoteCronusThe problem has always been that while the logic for removing GB appeared sound at first glance, with a little examination it's heavily flawed.'"
during the final years of GB (2001-2007) can you tell me the level of development of the game in wales,scotland & ireland...........i'll answer that for you...ABSOLUTELY COCK ALL!
now go look at whats happened in wales since 2008....and tell everyone "its heavily flawed"
ps wales under 18's beat scotland under 18's at the weekend.......that would'nt have happened 6 years ago..
Quoteheadhunter="headhunter"It's as much an amalgamation as a 'Europe' team would be. Regardless, if England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland are national teams, then GB would be a super-national entity. And I'm not a fan of anything other than national teams taking part in international competition. I wouldn't be a fan of an Anzac side, or a Pacific Islands side or a 'Celtic Tigers' side for the same reason, because it muddies the waters. And if you consider GB to be a national side, then again that causes problems because we have interchangeable national teams and players automatically qualifying for more than one nation, it just creates a mess, we need a standardized international setup. If we accept England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland as independent entities in RL terms (which we do, given their separate governing bodies and memberships of the RLEF), then they should compete as such.'"
And they do, and would compete as such. There is no reason to pretend that anyone who is English is anymore English than they are British. I would have no problem with a 'European' team playing an 'Australasian' side. Anzac, Pacific Isles, and Celtic tigers would be different.
QuoteheadhunterAgreed. This is why the RLIF needs to be urgently reformed. However, I'm not sure it would have made any difference in Uate's case. Fiji are less likely than Australia to play in major international matches just because of the difference between the two nations. Australia have a good chance of making the World Cup final, Fiji have less of a chance. The same goes for Rhys Evans with England. This happens in all sports, in football we see African players committing to nations like France because they are more likely to play in big games, it's something that is unavoidable.'"
Fiji are less likely to play in major international matches because they are included in fewer major international tournaments. That is the main reason. One of the things international football gets right, is that every two years, the clock is reset. It doesnt matter if you are france, Germany, Brazil, or Ecuador, San Marino or the Ivory Coast. You start back at the same point, with regular competitive international football. Everyone starts back at the same point. Which massively limits the impact compared to RL
QuoteheadhunterWhen is the last time anyone 'toured' anywhere? Tours are archaic. I'm not against the idea of GB being used as a touring side every so often, but I don't really see a situation where that would need to occur. As things stand, we are set to play a Northern Hemisphere 4N, a Southern Hemisphere 4N and a WC in a four-yearly cycle. I agree that nations other than England, Australia and NZ should be given more opportunities and be playing more regular, high-profile internationals, but the matches between England, NZ and Australia are the biggest money-spinners for the international game and so it's logical for them to dominate the international calendar at the moment.'"
2007 isnt that long ago and Tours would solve that problem. A four year cycle leaves a year, a year for a Tour. A year when GB and france can tour the Southern hemisphere, playing against the pacific island sides in their homes, and Aus NZ or Aus, nZ and a pac isles team can come north and play the home nations and france.
QuoteSmokeyTA="SmokeyTA"The ROI arent in the GB&I side. The entire island of Ireland is. It was a deliberate distinction which was chosen because of the political situation there. '"
Does the island of Ireland not include the Republic of Ireland? The Lions represent the ROI, and the UK. It really isn't that difficult. To say that GB&I doesn't include the ROI is just plain incorrect.
QuoteSmokeyTA="SmokeyTA"we dont a GB&ROI do we. We dont have GB&NI either. We have GB&I because we arent referring to the country ROI, we are referring to the rep side Ireland. It is exactly like Team GB because it was the national team of the UK, then we added the rep team of Ireland in aswell. '"
We don't have a GB&ROI because that would be stupid. It would exclude NI.
GB&NI would be the UK, which is a sovereign nation. Team GB are actually the Great Britain & Northern Ireland Olympic Team. Team GB is just its brand name. It's just easier to say. It has evolved from the time they have entered the Olympics being called "Great Britain & Ireland". Why they were entered as that back in the 19th century and not UK I don't know. The region has that many different names and been through that many transitions.
When saying GB&I, we are referring to the countries in these regions. Great Britain was the brand, and still is. They didn't want to drop that part of the brand, and added the rest necessary to keep it whilst still representing the areas. GB&I represent the UK and the ROI combined. There is no denying this. This is a fact. British Isles XIII, as it says on the badge, is the islands of Great Britain and Ireland combined. It encompasses two sovereign nations. It represents these two sovereign nations. To say that it doesn't is just plain incorrect.
"Great Britain" may be used loosely to describe the UK, but it isn't correct. GB is just England, Scotland and Wales.
QuoteSmokeyTA="SmokeyTA"No it was the national side of the country of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and NI and was for 80+ years before we added the rep side of Ireland.'"
Have you just made that up? 80 years ago we were just called The Lions. Before that, we were the Northern Union. Australia weren't even Australia a lot of the time. They toured as Australasia and included Kiwi players. They weren't Great Britain until the late 40s.
They didn't just add the rep side of Ireland, they added the correct tag that would allow them to keep Great Britain in the name.
QuoteSmokeyTA="SmokeyTA"No i was using it to distinguish between the north and the republic and the island as a whole. The context made it pretty clear for anyone but a moron. '"
I understood it. It was just completely pointless to use a word that can represent both to distinguish from the two!
QuoteSmokeyTA="SmokeyTA"Great Britain is a country,'"
No it bloody isn't! It's an island that includes England, Wales and Scotland. Until you can understand this, you are forever digging yourself a whole. It is loosely, but incorrectly, used to mean United Kingdom.
QuoteSmokeyTA="SmokeyTA"i am citizen of it.'"
You are not. You are a citizen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
QuoteSmokeyTA="SmokeyTA"I am a British Citizen, I have a British passport check your history.'"
British and Irish nationality laws are very complex. Being a British citizen means you hold a connection with the UK and the crown dependencies. being an Irish citizen means you hold a connection with the island of Ireland. Being born in Northern Ireland means you can hold both British and Irish citizenship.
By saying being British means Britain is a country would also mean that being Irish means Ireland is a country. Both are wrong. Neither Great Britain or Ireland are countries.
QuoteSmokeyTA="SmokeyTA"More pertinently check your rugby league history. In our game, our national side for the vast majority of our games history was the GB side. Their flag was the union flag, their anthem was God save the queen, and they included players from all over the UK. Northern Irish players have always been eligible. Like Team GB, the GB lions were a UK representative side. The reason they were called GB is for ease of use, and that GB can be used, and often is, as a synonym for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (as is 'the uk') Until and Ireland was added Brian Carney, who, as a citizen of the ROI didnt qualify for GB, did as a member of the Island of Ireland rep side. '"
Yes you're right. GB was for ease of use, as that is what it was originally called. It's easier than saying GB&I. GB is often used, incorrectly, to mean the UK.
Brian Carney qualified for the team that represented him, Great Britain & Ireland. The fact that you think GB is a country is why you are struggling to understand the rest of this. You need to be either a British citizen or an Irish citizen. If they made a Pacific Isles team, it would be a similarly contrived multi-national rep side. It really isn't that difficult.
QuoteSmokeyTA="SmokeyTA"No, it is opinion. The GB lions had a British Isles X111 on their crest for about 80 years when players from the republic werent eligible. Back when the GB lions were the national side of the UK.
This is what you seem to have missed completely. GB was the national side. It was the UK's national side. It included NI. It always did. It was created to represent that nation. Not the republic.'"
Did the GB Lions have a British Isles XIII crest for 80 years? I'm pretty certain it was added in the late 90s. Most of the shirts in the 90s didn't have "British Isles XIII" on it. And 80 years ago the team were just the Lions, not GB.
QuoteSmokeyTA="SmokeyTA"The fact it represents one nation, the nation it always represented, the United Kingdom of GB and Northern Ireland, and one rep side, a whole of Ireland side, is a deliberate choice. It is a deliberate decision that neither Northern Ireland, nor the Sovereign nation of the Republic of Ireland are mentioned.'"
Yes, to keep the GB brand. What you are saying is that the side added a second sovereign nation, ROI, and used the correct terminolgy to keep the name Great Britain (the brand) in the title. I can't believe you're still trying to dig yourself into this hole.
QuoteSmokeyTA="SmokeyTA"Just as another example for you, Rory McIlroy will likely represent Team GB at the 2016 olympics, he represents the all Ireland team at the golf World Cup, and represent GB&I in the Seve Trophy. Or Paul Mcginley who would play for the Republic of Ireland in the olympics, Ireland in the Alfred Dunhill cup and GB&I in the Seve trophy.'"
Rory McIlroy (Belfast born) represents Team GB (officially called the Great Britain & Northern Ireland Olympic team) is hardly a shock.
It is also hardly a shock that he would represent an All Ireland side, being Irish.
It is also hardly a shock that he would represent a GB&I side, being from Ireland.
What is your point here?
Paul McGinley (Dublin born) represents Ireland at the Olympics is also hardly hard to comprehend.
Nor is it that he represents Ireland in the Alfred Dunhill Cup.
Or GB&I in the Seve Trophy.
He is Irish. He qualifies for them all.
I don't get what you're trying to prove here, other than an Irishman represents an Irish side, and also a GB&I side. None of them are nations. They are geographical areas which he represents.
You've written a lot of b*llocks on here to try and argue something that just isn't true. Great Britain isn't a country. It hasn't been since 1801. The fact it used to be a country and is used to describe a geographical area is most likely why people still refer to the nation. But it is incorrect.
The Lions do not represent one country alone. They are a multinational side (which includes the UK and ROI).
These are facts. These aren't opinions. I'm not surprised though that you keep dragging this on though as you can never admit when you get something wrong.
QuoteWellsy13="Wellsy13"Does the island of Ireland not include the Republic of Ireland? The Lions represent the ROI, and the UK. It really isn't that difficult. To say that GB&I doesn't include the ROI is just plain incorrect'"
No, it deliberately doesnt. It includes an all-ireland side. One which doesnt represent either the ROI or NI, but the Island of Ireland. There are some pretty obvious reasons why somoene from NI wouldnt want to play for a team which represented the ROI and vice versa.
QuoteWellsy13We don't have a GB&ROI because that would be stupid. It would exclude NI.
GB&NI would be the UK, which is a sovereign nation. Team GB are actually the Great Britain & Northern Ireland Olympic Team. Team GB is just its brand name. It's just easier to say. It has evolved from the time they have entered the Olympics being called "Great Britain & Ireland". Why they were entered as that back in the 19th century and not UK I don't know. The region has that many different names and been through that many transitions.'"
Exactly like the GB lions.
QuoteWellsy13When saying GB&I, we are referring to the countries in these regions. Great Britain was the brand, and still is. They didn't want to drop that part of the brand, and added the rest necessary to keep it whilst still representing the areas. GB&I represent the UK and the ROI combined. There is no denying this. This is a fact. British Isles XIII, as it says on the badge, is the islands of Great Britain and Ireland combined. It encompasses two sovereign nations. It represents these two sovereign nations. To say that it doesn't is just plain incorrect'"
Why you keep equating ‘ireland’ with the republic of Ireland, I don’t know. It clearly isn’t.
QuoteWellsy13"Great Britain" may be used loosely to describe the UK, but it isn't correct. GB is just England, Scotland and Wales.'"
If people understand it, it is correct. It is the beauty of the English language, it keeps evolving.
QuoteWellsy13Have you just made that up? 80 years ago we were just called The Lions. Before that, we were the Northern Union. Australia weren't even Australia a lot of the time. They toured as Australasia and included Kiwi players. They weren't Great Britain until the late 40s.'"
My apologies, we have been GB since the 1940’s. which is 65 years ago, not 80+, that makes a huge difference.
QuoteWellsy13They didn't just add the rep side of Ireland, they added the correct tag that would allow them to keep Great Britain in the name.'"
No, according to your logic, the name would GB and NI and ROI because that is where it represents. But it doesn’t, because it isn’t. It is called GB and I a team of people eligible to represent Great Britain, including those from Northern Ireland, as it was before and those eligible to represent the all Ireland team.
QuoteWellsy13I understood it. It was just completely pointless to use a word that can represent both to distinguish from the two!'"
Except you understood it. If you understood it, it acheived its aim perfectly.
QuoteWellsy13No it bloody isn't! It's an island that includes England, Wales and Scotland. Until you can understand this, you are forever digging yourself a whole. It is loosely, but incorrectly, used to mean United Kingdom.'"
No, it can be used to describe sovereign nation of Great Britain and often is, as you yourself admit.
QuoteWellsy13You are not. You are a citizen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.'"
Yes, I am a citizen of the UK, GB, The united Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. They can all be used to describe the same thing.
QuoteWellsy13British and Irish nationality laws are very complex. Being a British citizen means you hold a connection with the UK and the crown dependencies. being an Irish citizen means you hold a connection with the island of Ireland'"
Thanks for this, I, along surely with everyone else was wondering what citizenship meant.
QuoteWellsy13Being born in Northern Ireland means you can hold both British and Irish citizenship.
By saying being British means Britain is a country would also mean that being Irish means Ireland is a country. Both are wrong. Neither Great Britain or Ireland are countries.'"
Erm, no it doesnt.
QuoteWellsy13Yes you're right. GB was for ease of use, as that is what it was originally called. It's easier than saying GB&I. GB is often used, incorrectly, to mean the UK.'"
Except it wasnt GB&I originally. The I was added later, and yes, it is a good thing you have accepted that GB is often used, for ease of use, to mean the UK, those two abbreviations can mean the same thing.
QuoteWellsy13Brian Carney qualified for the team that represented him, Great Britain & Ireland. The fact that you think GB is a country is why you are struggling to understand the rest of this. You need to be either a British citizen or an Irish citizen. If they made a Pacific Isles team, it would be a similarly contrived multi-national rep side. It really isn't that difficult.'"
Brian Carney wasnt eligible because he isnt British. He can however represent the Island of Ireland, not the ROI because there is no ROI team, there is no ROI RL administration. There is an all-Ireland administration and all-ireland rep side. Which is what made Carney eligible.
QuoteWellsy13Did the GB Lions have a British Isles XIII crest for 80 years? I'm pretty certain it was added in the late 90s. Most of the shirts in the 90s didn't have "British Isles XIII" on it. And 80 years ago the team were just the Lions, not GB'"
.And.........
QuoteWellsy13Yes, to keep the GB brand. What you are saying is that the side added a second sovereign nation, ROI, and used the correct terminolgy to keep the name Great Britain (the brand) in the title. I can't believe you're still trying to dig yourself into this hole.'"
No, Im not. What im saying, is what I said originally. That GB & NI are a sovereign nation, and the GB Lions were the national side of that nation. However, NI is now administered as part of an all-ireland RL league and representative side. Ireland. This encompases Northern Ireland and The Republic of Ireland but for obvious political reasons isn’t either or both. It is a rep side, for the Island of Ireland, not the de factor ROI side. So what the GB&I side was referring to, deliberately, was the former national side of GB&NI ‘the GB Lions’, and the all-Ireland rep side.
QuoteWellsy13Rory McIlroy (Belfast born) represents Team GB (officially called the Great Britain & Northern Ireland Olympic team) is hardly a shock.
It is also hardly a shock that he would represent an All Ireland side, being Irish.
It is also hardly a shock that he would represent a GB&I side, being from Ireland.
What is your point here?
Paul McGinley (Dublin born) represents Ireland at the Olympics is also hardly hard to comprehend.
Nor is it that he represents Ireland in the Alfred Dunhill Cup.
Or GB&I in the Seve Trophy.
He is Irish. He qualifies for them all.
I don't get what you're trying to prove here, other than an Irishman represents an Irish side, and also a GB&I side. None of them are nations. They are geographical areas which he represents.'"
It is simply an analogue to this situation. Where the Ireland in GB&I doesn’t refer to the republic but to the all-ireland side they both represent.
QuoteWellsy13You've written a lot of b*llocks on here to try and argue something that just isn't true. Great Britain isn't a country. It hasn't been since 1801. The fact it used to be a country and is used to describe a geographical area is most likely why people still refer to the nation. But it is incorrect.
The Lions do not represent one country alone. They are a multinational side (which includes the UK and ROI).
These are facts. These aren't opinions. I'm not surprised though that you keep dragging this on though as you can never admit when you get something wrong.'"
I honestly don’t know how to explain this any simpler for you. There was and is a deliberate decision for Ireland to be administered and represented on an all Ireland basis, where it represents no sovereign nation but the Island of Ireland to avoid any political considerations, and this is what forms the ‘ireland’ in GB and Ireland, it isn’t meant as another name for the republic. GB was the national side for the UK, for ease of use it was referred to as GB. These teams were then merged. This is why we have one nation GB (which was used as an analogue of GB, as you admit) and one island, Ireland.
I've cut out the parts where you're just repeating the same incorrect nonsense and thought if look at your new ways of digging yourself further into the wrong:
QuoteSmokeyTA="SmokeyTA"
No, according to your logic, the name would GB and NI and ROI because that is where it represents. '"
Not really my logic at all. However, it is exactly the same as saying GB & I. It's exactly the same as saying British Isles. And it's exactly the same as the UK& ROI. But they wanted to keep GB in the title, and GB & I is shorter.
QuoteSmokeyTA="SmokeyTA"
Except you understood it. If you understood it, it acheived its aim perfectly.
'"
In spite of, not because of. Don't pat yourself on the back.
QuoteSmokeyTA="SmokeyTA"
If people understand it, it is correct. It is the beauty of the English language, it keeps evolving.
It is a good thing you have accepted that GB is often used, for ease of use, to mean the UK, those two abbreviations can mean the same thing.'"
Absolute nonsense. Earlier in this thread, you were (incorrectly) accused me of calling the ROI "Ireland" (when really you were confusing GB as meaning the UK). Many people refer to the ROI as Ireland. Does that make it correct? Because you've just tried telling me off for it, which is a huge contradiction on your part!
Maybe, just maybe, you are wrong on this and you're being disingenuous in trying to convince me that I'm wrong to save yourself the blushes.
Apparently if people keep saying things incorrectly, it's correct? So the fact that so many refer to the UK as England means Scotland and Wales are also England. That's what you're saying.
All views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RLFANS.COM or its subsites.
Whilst every effort is made to ensure that news stories, articles and images are correct, we cannot be held responsible for errors. However, if you feel any material on this website is copyrighted or incorrect in any way please contact us using the link at the top of the page so we can remove it or negotiate copyright permission.
RLFANS.COM, the owners of this website, is not responsible for the content of its sub-sites or posts, please email the author of this sub-site or post if you feel you find an article offensive or of a choice nature that you disagree with.