Which is why any all stars gimmick (if at all) should be in addition to, and not replacing international RL. We could do both. Or we could just drop the pointless all-star game.



When did we do this?

and how are the supposed to do this when we dont play them any more?



Ahh, so you want to compare 20 tests against Australia to 6 against France. And for no discernible reason we set that timescale, randomly at 11 years. That seems, well.... random.

They are two very different questions you know.



The reason i was asking was because it was clearly obvious that we never have done, it is simply assumed.



Frankly nobody could say with any certainty who the next best would even be, it is entirely dependant on what team each country could be bothered putting out. Christ the look at what the Cook Islands achieved!



France, Samoa, Fiji, Tonga, PNG could all have a decent stab at it. With the support of the NRL and SL put out decent, competitive teams who could all beat each other, and with with a bit of look scrape a result against England.



But we simply dont know who is better, and what they could do, because we dont play anywhere near enough international RL and very few nations and very rarely do they get the chance to play the big teams.



We need more international RL, even if there is few drubbings in there, not less, this game would be a nice addition to the calendar, but it is superfluous and certainly not a replacement for international RL



It is sad that the arrogance and disregard the ARL have shown over the years to international RL has spread to these shores.

I like how you've changed the question.

If we PLAYED (past tense), not PLAY (future tense). If we PLAYED France as often as Australia, do you think they'd beat us? With a team of part time players? I don't.





Exactly, and that was about 20 years ago, right? So we've not lost to any other nation we've played in about 20 years. But it's arrogant to think France (who haven't even been the fourth best nation) wouldn't beat us if we played them as much as Australia?

I do find it hard to believe that you yourself are complaining about arrogance anyway.





Nah, it would definitely be worse. If losing to Australia nearly all the time is bad, losing to England/GB ALL the time must be a lot worse!

I think you will find you have changed the question. It would "if we had played" if you meant purely past tense " if we played" would still be the future tense. Do i think if we had played France 20 times over the past 11 years they would have beaten us at least once? yeah probably so. We have been pretty appalling at times and France have put on some pretty good results against, Australia, NZ and ourselves



Well yes, it is. It is pretty arrogant to think that if we played France 20 times they wouldnt beat us once.







So losing 6 times in 20 years is a lot worse than losing 17 times in 11?

145 points and just one try. How abysmal.





Agree with replacing MM. Whilst it is a fun day, it would be more beneficial and probably just as entertaining to watch Internationals/7's than SL games.

You think a team of part-timers from a nation not even regarded as fourth best in the world would beat a team of full-timers who have been regarded as second to third best in the world? I'd like to see he odds on something like that!

Who was the last team to beat Aus/NZ outside of the big three and when was that?





it's not arrogant at all. It's a pretty fair claim based on the strength of the two nations teams and past results in similar situations. It's not undue, it's not unfounded. And it cannot be compared to Eng/GB vs Aus.



I'm beginning to think you don't understand the meaning of he word arrogance!





If the other side of the stick is winning 0 and winning more than 0, than yes, it is worse

this whole argument is pointless.



until france has at least 25 players worthy of plying there trade in the SLE they will never compete with england in friendlies or competitions.

A Championship select would beat France on occasion , they would provide a better test for the Euro Countries

Apparently if we played them 20 times, they'd beat us.

at this moment in time i really dont care about france or wales.



because of the politics these day i really dont care about the SLE as well.



but england is different, from a sporting point of view i live for the day i see england beat australia in a final or even better to win a three match series after the spoils were shared in the first two matches.

until they get 70 or 80+ they are not going to come close! Hence why we need Toulouse in and why the French League needs to step up a gear and start producing enough talent not just for the 2 SL French teams but also for English and Australian clubs to sign as well. Same for PNG. Its cloud cuckoo land to think any nation that does not have a large number of eligible players playing in the top leagues of the world will ever compete with the big 3.