USA qualfies for RLWC

[Yossarian]

Beat Jamaica 40-4 to win the Atlantic qualfying section (South Africa were the 3rd team). Sadly the team for these games was selected solely from the AMNRL. Hopefully now they've qualified there may be some attention given by the IRL and USARL players will be considered for selection.

Junior Paulo turned out for the Americans. Matt Petersen too apparently.

 

[Fraze23]

Thats great news for the development of international rugby league.
America could play a pivotal role in strengthening the game internationally.
What NRL players are eligable for America? I remember Ryan Mcgoldrick and Clint Newtown are?
I just hope Wales can put up a bit of a show in the four nations.

 

[Yossarian]

Not sure Fraze apart from the guys you mention. Ryan McGoldrick? Is he still playing! In any event, now that they're in the WC I'm sure we'll start hearing more about fringe NRL players with US heritage. I just hope they don't go overboard - having the US-based guys is essential.

As you say though, it is very good news for international league.

 

[Gothetigers]

For the first time in their history, the United States will contest the Rugby League World Cup after the Tomahawks defeated Jamaica 40-4 in the 2013 Atlantic Zone Qualifier Sunday in Camden, NJ.
They now join Wales and the Cook Islands in Group D of the main tournament to be held in England and Wales.

“It is fantastic to achieve the opportunity to represent USA rugby league in the World Cup,” said a jubilant captain Apple Pope.

“Jamaica deserve enormous credit but a massive thank you has to be paid to our coach Matty Elliott who instilled an ethic around working hard for success which all the boys committed themselves to and it paid off.”

Pope’s men put up a terrific second half performance to deny the rugby reggae boys, posting 36 unanswered points and spark wild celebrations in the New Jersey suburb.

The hosts included Castleford utility Ryan McGoldrick in their lineup after he served a ban and there was nothing to choose between the sides or indication of what was to follow in an absorbing first forty minutes.

The game was scoreless for just over the opening quarter, Sheffield’s Corey Hanson giving the Jamaicans the lead for the only time in the 26th minute when he crossed on the blindside, Jymel Coleman missing the conversion.

The USA hit back four minutes before the break, substitute Stephen Howard crashing on to a fine short ball from standoff David Miles, Joseph Paulo goaling to make it 6-4 at halftime.

Scrum half David Marando’s try five minutes into the second period edged the hosts a converted score ahead, center Mitchell Stevens extending the lead soon after to give the Tomahawks breathing space.

Although he missed both conversions, two penalties in as many minutes from Joseph Paulo around the hour mark made it 18-4 and sapped the Jamaican resistance.

USA finished strongly, Mark Cantoni crossing to effectively seal the win and they added three more touchdowns in the final seven minutes through Miles, Danny Howard and prop Mark Offerdahl with their seventh four-pointer, Paulo adding the extras to two of them.

“Playing for a spot in the World Cup was a huge motivator,” said Offerdahl. “We concentrated on what we could do best and it paid off. We were confident that if we put everything together - and we did - we would win.”

 

[Gothetigers]

Former Warrior, Cowboy and Titans play David Myles also plays for them

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Ugh, they call tries touchdowns…
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED

 

[Tigerdave]

Should be fairly good for the game, be interesting to see what the TV numbers in the States will be like during it all.

Hopefully the Tomahawks can get a win or 2.

 

[Fraze23]

Wales, Cook Islands and USA in pool D.
Garhh they're taking a backwards step if they follow the same setup as the 2008 world cup. With Australia, England and New Zealand in the same pool. I know there'll be some floggings, but you've got to break the powerhouses of international rugby league into seperate pools.

 

[Yossarian]

Wales, Cook Islands and USA in pool D.
Garhh they're taking a backwards step if they follow the same setup as the 2008 world cup. With Australia, England and New Zealand in the same pool. I know there'll be some floggings, but you've got to break the powerhouses of international rugby league into seperate pools.

They're not all in the same pool. For the record:

Group A: Australia, England, Fiji, Ireland
Group B: NZ, PNG, France, Samoa
Group C: Scotland, Tonga, Italy or Lebanon
Group D: Wales, Cook Islands, USA

 

[Yossarian]

Ugh, they call tries touchdowns…
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED

To be fair they're aiming that at the American market who know would just be confused by tries. Even US fans familiar with union would probably be confused by the term try…

 

[Marshall_magic]

Wales, Cook Islands and USA in pool D.
Garhh they're taking a backwards step if they follow the same setup as the 2008 world cup. With Australia, England and New Zealand in the same pool. I know there'll be some floggings, but you've got to break the powerhouses of international rugby league into seperate pools.

I disagree, I think it's better for them if they compete against teams in their league. In all seriousness, does it give the tournament any cred if you have groups where you have teams racking up centuries? Also, do the players from the developing countries learn anything from being towelled up like that? In the last cup you have the 6 "minnow" nations (although there was some quality there) competing for a crack at one of the big nations (which Fiji ultimately earned and played pretty well).

If they are going to split them up, at least have 2 "seeded" groups and 2 "unseeded" groups, going off Yoss' post and having groups of:

Group A: Australia, England, Fiji, Ireland
Group B: NZ, PNG, France, Samoa
Group C: Scotland, Tonga, Italy or Lebanon
Group D: Wales, Cook Islands, USA

I'd have the top 2 from A and B go through to the finals as well as the winners of C and D, finals format:

Qualifying final
Winner C vs Runner Up B (QF1)
Winner D vs Runner Up A (QF2)

Semis
Winner A vs Winner QF1
Winner B vs Winner QF2

Winners play in Final, losers play in 3rd place play off (have minor placing games if you want to as well so teams play more than 2/3 games)

 

[happy_tiger]

Wales, Cook Islands and USA in pool D.
Garhh they're taking a backwards step if they follow the same setup as the 2008 world cup. With Australia, England and New Zealand in the same pool. I know there'll be some floggings, but you've got to break the powerhouses of international rugby league into seperate pools.

I disagree, I think it's better for them if they compete against teams in their league. In all seriousness, does it give the tournament any cred if you have groups where you have teams racking up centuries? Also, do the players from the developing countries learn anything from being towelled up like that? In the last cup you have the 6 "minnow" nations (although there was some quality there) competing for a crack at one of the big nations (which Fiji ultimately earned and played pretty well).

If they are going to split them up, at least have 2 "seeded" groups and 2 "unseeded" groups, going off Yoss' post and having groups of:

Group A: Australia, England, Fiji, Ireland
Group B: NZ, PNG, France, Samoa
Group C: Scotland, Tonga, Italy or Lebanon
Group D: Wales, Cook Islands, USA

I'd have the top 2 from A and B go through to the finals as well as the winners of C and D, finals format:

Qualifying final
Winner C vs Runner Up B (QF1)
Winner D vs Runner Up A (QF2)

Semis
Winner A vs Winner QF1
Winner B vs Winner QF2

Winners play in Final, losers play in 3rd place play off (have minor placing games if you want to as well so teams play more than 2/3 games)

Apart from soccer many world cup games are one sided in all sports

 

[Marshall_magic]

Agreed, but say for example Cricket and Union, you don't have 1 team wallop all others in their group in 2nd gear (it may happen from time to time, but only when they are very good), which is what would happen if we had Australia, NZ and Eng all in their own groups. It also adds more to the event when you have a few marquee match ups. Having seeded and unseeded groups gives the developing nations something to aim for (top their group), the middle nations get a shot at the big guns and it gives the fans some big match ups in the group stage to generate interest.

 

[Yossarian]

The actual finals are something like this:

Top 3 qualify from the seeded groups
Top team qualifies from groups C and D

I'm not sure how the QF work but I'd assume it's something like:

Top A v winner C
Top B v winner D
2nd A v 3rd B
3rd A v 2nd B

Personally I think it's an improvement on last time. It still limits the blow-outs but someone like PNG isn't on a hiding to nothing like they were last time. PNG and Samoa would be good chances to finish 2nd in their group and maybe make the semi finals.

 

[Fraze23]

Wales, Cook Islands and USA in pool D.
Garhh they're taking a backwards step if they follow the same setup as the 2008 world cup. With Australia, England and New Zealand in the same pool. I know there'll be some floggings, but you've got to break the powerhouses of international rugby league into seperate pools.

I disagree, I think it's better for them if they compete against teams in their league. In all seriousness, does it give the tournament any cred if you have groups where you have teams racking up centuries? Also, do the players from the developing countries learn anything from being towelled up like that? In the last cup you have the 6 "minnow" nations (although there was some quality there) competing for a crack at one of the big nations (which Fiji ultimately earned and played pretty well).

If they are going to split them up, at least have 2 "seeded" groups and 2 "unseeded" groups, going off Yoss' post and having groups of:

Group A: Australia, England, Fiji, Ireland
Group B: NZ, PNG, France, Samoa
Group C: Scotland, Tonga, Italy or Lebanon
Group D: Wales, Cook Islands, USA

I'd have the top 2 from A and B go through to the finals as well as the winners of C and D, finals format:

Qualifying final
Winner C vs Runner Up B (QF1)
Winner D vs Runner Up A (QF2)

Semis
Winner A vs Winner QF1
Winner B vs Winner QF2

Winners play in Final, losers play in 3rd place play off (have minor placing games if you want to as well so teams play more than 2/3 games)

Apart from soccer many world cup games are one sided in all sports

Sorry i didn't realise that was how they had structured it this time. By the looks of things its very logical and as fair as it can be. I just saw pool D and assumed it was the same format as 08.
This should be the best world cup we've had so far.

 

[Tigerdave]

I hope that we get to actually see EVERY game on free to air.

 

[Marshall_magic]

The actual finals are something like this:

Top 3 qualify from the seeded groups
Top team qualifies from groups C and D

I'm not sure how the QF work but I'd assume it's something like:

Top A v winner C
Top B v winner D
2nd A v 3rd B
3rd A v 2nd B

Personally I think it's an improvement on last time. It still limits the blow-outs but someone like PNG isn't on a hiding to nothing like they were last time. PNG and Samoa would be good chances to finish 2nd in their group and maybe make the semi finals.

Yeah, I had a look today at the format. Top 3 from the seeded pools go through, so I guess they all have something to aim for (rather than Aus, NZ, Eng and PNG romping their group). I agree that it is an improvement (due to an increase in depth of second string nations), we won't be ready for equal pools at our world cup for a while yet.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Agreed, but say for example Cricket and Union, you don't have 1 team wallop all others in their group in 2nd gear (it may happen from time to time, but only when they are very good), which is what would happen if we had Australia, NZ and Eng all in their own groups. It also adds more to the event when you have a few marquee match ups. Having seeded and unseeded groups gives the developing nations something to aim for (top their group), the middle nations get a shot at the big guns and it gives the fans some big match ups in the group stage to generate interest.

It's important to have a few marquee round robin events, otherwise no one would show up until the finals series, further making the sport look like a joke internationally.

I also believe during the world cup, players who play for Australia/New Zealand should be encouraged and allowed to play for heritage countries or their countries of birth (i.e. Lote, Uate & Hayne play for Fiji, Farah for Lebanon…) to increase the profile of the minnow nations.

 

[dobes97]

My dads coaching the Denver team, were getting jerseys from the NRL.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_

 

[Chris]

Personally I think that until both the AMNRL and the USARL can unite to form one league that runs a competition from both the east and west coasts, the USA should not be allowed to be in the RLWC. At the moment both the AMNRL and USARL run separate competitions where the majority of the teams are from the east coast.