jamie peacock has mentioned in a article that we should bring back GB every 4 years because it will help the celtic nations retain players......its seriously flawed thinking and this is why..

1. with GB playing every 4 years players are still going to opt for england cos england playing in big tournaments EVERY year and go on tour every other year.....so wales,scotland & ireland are still going to lose players.

2. theres not a single welsh,scots or irish player that would make the GB team anyway...the entire squad would be current england players.....and it would be for years to come


theres not a single benefit to any home nation in bring back GB...


what we should do however is.......wales,scotland & ireland should form their own touring/combination team called the celtic tigers....this team could tour down under...or if the celtic nations agree could play off against france for a 4nations spot or play england instead of england playing the exiles.....the celtic tigers team would do more for the celtic nations than GB ever will as it will keep the focus on the celtic nations and celtic player development.....its about enticing players to stick with or opt for wales,scotland or ireland and giving them something to play for and not about kicking all that development into touch and pretending 17 englishmen in GB jerseys is good for wales,scotland & ireland...cos it is'nt!

so lets leave England as England and lets reward wales,scotland & ireland for their development with better opportunities....

discuss..

It's an interesting idea, but as I see it at the moment the Celtic Tigers would just be Wales under a different name, just as the Lions would, as you point out, be England.

i don't think wales would dominate at all...i think it would be a good mix of all 3 nations

just done a quick fire "celtic tigers " 13

1. greg McNally - ire/elliot kear - wales
2. damien blanche - ire
3. stu littler - ire
4. rhys evans - eng/wales
5. pat richards - ire
6. scott grix - ire
7. danny brough - scot/eng
8. jordan james - wales
9. mike mcllorum - eng/ire (he's only in the eng team cos roby is'nt playing,otherwise he's nowhere near england)
10. craig kopczak - wales
11. ben evans - wales
12. dale ferguson - scot
13. tyrone McCarthy - ire

not a bad side that imo certainly stronger than wales,scotland or ireland.

I'm glad Jamie has stimulated this discussion again. For me the Exiles is a flawed concept; why pay to have washed out ex-NRL players getting together for meaningless games?

The point of the mid season representative games should be to give OUR players the experience of the "camp";playing an intense series of games over a short period.
I'm a fan of a Saxons v Celts series, with the end of season reverting to Great Britain. Can't see the benefit mid-season of French involvement at least in the short term; it would basically just decimate the Dragons team for the duration of the tournament.

Ideal would be along Origin lines; a three match series with the teams missing the Super League rounds the week before each game to prepare for a real tussle! This would obviously weaken a few teams for a few weeks but Brisbane and Melbourne seem to be able to handle it OK. Its not like you can win the competition from fifth or anything!

How about the Normans,Picts,Ancient Britons,Afro Carribeansetc?

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.

Cronus, do you think if there was some sort of assurance that some Celtic Tigers team were to play the top teams pretty much every year (Eg Expand 4 Nations into a 6N involving say Aus, NZ, Eng, CT, Fra, PNG?) would that achieve the same sort of goal as allowing them to play for GB?

(As in players would opt for CT over England)

No, and I think it's a terrible idea. Another half-baked forced entity in a desperate bid to create a competitive team. I highly doubt 'Celtic' fans would turn out in number to support such an odd creation, and the message it sends is demeaning to RL in general - a weak sport hooked on desperately creating sides in the name of...well, what exactly? The sporting world would be laughing their heads off at us (again).

As for the players - well, let's say your mother is English and your father Welsh. You can opt for England RL or Wales and Celtic Tigers. Seriously?? A much as I find the England RL brand naff, it's a million times stronger than Wales RL or some false touring side which will still be a weak side. Instead, give that player the option of Wales RL and Great Britain they'll be far more tempted to turn out for Wales.

RL has to fact facts. We are not strong in Wales/Scotland/Ireland, certainly not strong enough to be putting purely homegrown teams out in their name. We have no roots there. Small steps are being made, certainly in Wales and that's the way to progress. Crusaders had the potential but were advanced far too quickly and were doomed to failure. These things take time - decades, even - but that's how you create a grounded team with a loyal fan base - develop roots from the ground up - not just create a club, throw it in and expect miracles. From that can develop a strong national side.

Peacock is absolutely correct. Great Britain was the pinnacle of British RL, the days of the 82/86/88/90/92/94/01/03 Ashes tours were epic and are ingrained on all who remember them. Even the Tri Nations meant more with GB fighting it out with the old enemy. That some executive decided to dispose of GB based on flawed logic is no reason not to reverse that dreadful decision.

Home nations in world cups, and when we play each other, GB in tours and 4nations.

The 23 - 12 win in Sydney was as Great Britain.

I would favour a return to GB too, as I think England has basically adopted all those players anyway. Funny how brough was scotish then English again when it dawned that scotland would never see a game against Oz or Nz.

Top players need the top profile, with the UK no player can be excluded from England selection.

Return to GB and one year out of 4 home nations for the WC.

however I do like the saxons v celts idea over, exiles. It's a representative game, it would allow those playing to be considered for GB selection. It can be played home and away. I would rather see that and some passion in playing for a shirt that gets representation rather than the current exiles concept which whilst well intended creates no passion as there is no exiles passionate supporters.

Oops how did I type that!! England, of course, have failed to beat Australia since the GB split.



Well there you go, I can't really remember any great England RL moments. Actually, not true, I was at the 1995 semi-final and of course we beat the Aussies at Wembley in the opener.