For Once Lets Think Outside of the Box.

By Daniel Andruczyk

Last week Steve Mascord broke the news that the Samoan Rugby League have approached the RLIF about hosting an international 9s competition. Steve also mentioned that the RLIF are thinking of having and international circuit like in the Union 7s but that the NRL and ESL clubs releasing players was the big issue. I just shook my head at this. Steve even you should have seen how we can do this outside of the regular box! So here are my thoughts on this proposal.

International 9s

Lets get one thing straight, there are a tone of 9s tournaments all over the world. Australia and England obviously have the biggest ones. The basic backbone for a 9s circuit is already there. One of the advantages of the 9s is that it can be much cheaper to field a team with only a squad of 15 needed. The 9s tournaments are spread through the whole year quite nicely actually. They start off in January with the International 9s in Australia, yes there already is an International 9s, then there are tournaments in Jamaica, England, France, Italy, Germany, Lebanon even Norway/Scandinavia have one.

The format I envisage is a 32 team competition, 8 groups of 4 teams that play each other through the 9 tournaments around the world. Each team plays each other once in the group and the top teams go through to the quarter finals for the cup, then the second ranked teams play for a bowl and the last places for a plate. For each position they would get points and go into a league table and at the end of the season the team with the most number of points is declared the winner.

The season would not run though through the regular XIII season. Most of the countries have their season in either the Northern Hemisphere Summer or Southern Hemisphere winter, that is March through to October. I would have the 9’s overlap a bit I guess but run mainly though the Christmas break, September through to March. This way people can have their rugby league fix through the regular domestic off season. Tournaments would happen every 3 weeks or so.

The Countries

The 9s concept is a nice one really. 9 players, 9 minutes per half, in keeping with this idea we can have an international circuit of 9 countries/regions with tournaments. And these tournaments can be based on already existing ones that we have. The countries/regions that I would have are:

  1. Australasia (Australia, New Zealand, PNG, Japan)
  2. Pacific (Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, Cook Islands)
  3. North American (USA, Jamaica, Canada)
  4. African (South Africa, Morocco)
  5. Western Europe (England, France, Germany, Netherlands)
  6. Eastern Europe (Russia, Estonia, Ukraine)
  7. Scandinavia (Norway, Sweden, Denmark)
  8. Mediterranean (Italy, Malta, Greece, Serbia)
  9. Middle East (Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, UAE)

They can be moved around each year to allow the game to be exposed to more countries and people. The concept of 9’s would allow many of the New World team to field players that can be much more competitive against traditional Rugby League powers too.

The players

As mentioned previously, the article says the concept would need the backing of ESL and NRL clubs, weather they will release the players, when in the calendar to play the games – well would they need their backing?

See why do we need to use NRL or ESL players? Why can’t we have a dedicated set of players that play the 9s circuit. There may be many players out there that maybe aren’t great in the XIII format but would be fabulous 9s players. Also why can’t we use past players or players that are retiring to keep them in the game a bit longer and help spread the game? This is basically what rugby union does.

This way clubs don’t have to fork out their money or risk injury to players, yet we still can have “Stars” of the game involved and have Rugby League played all year around. You see often fans complaining or reminiscing about how they can’t wait for the news league season to start, well, lets have the 9’s circuit in the regular off season and in doing so promote the international scene. It won’t effect the regular internationals wither, I mean we don’t seem to have the Union 7s dominating the XV code do we. But for some of the New World Nations it may be a more viable option.

The Real World

Of course all of what I said would be in a perfect world, to start with there probably wont be 32 nations, more like maybe 8-12, but that’s OK, we still can come up with a flexible system that allows the tournaments to expand or contract on a yearly basis as is needed. To start with we may need a few of the NRL players to gain some recognition, but certainly eventually we want to get away from having any of the NRL players under contract involved. I agree with what Colin Love said in that any new 9s or 7s circuit would need to be using international teams and not club teams.

But for once lets think outside of the box in how we do this. Lets not continually have to rely just on the NRL or one or two countries, lets get rid of the old boys club and have the sport be more all encompassing. Lets use the short format as a real stepping stone to something bigger and greater.

Daniel Andruczyk’s email: daniel@rugbyleagueinternationalscores.com
banner ad

29 Responses to “For Once Lets Think Outside of the Box.”

  1. Jim says:

    I like it, a 9’s competition would really help in developing the game IMO, same with a junior World Cup.

    Have to start somewhere first, hopefully the Samoan 9’s get off the ground and we can build from there.

    • manky franky says:

      rugby league needs to get its act together and get this sorted, 7s or 9s both great entertainment and a way of finding some class players.

    • druzik says:

      Mmmm…. when would you have the Junior world cup?

      Well there are already many many 9s competitions already where we can start something off.

      International 9s in Australia,
      MX 9s in England
      Heidelberg 9s
      Lezignan 9s
      Jamaican 9s
      Simone Franchini 9s
      Scandinavian 9s

      • Jim says:

        Haven’t really thought about timing, maybe every two years. I would have it as U-18 or 19. I’d play it in regional pools to save on travel the have the finals in a “deveoping country”. It might have to start smaller scale but how about something like this:

        Pool A – Played in Australia
        Australia
        PNG
        Fiji
        Atlantic Qualifier (South Africa)

        Pool B – PLayed in NZ
        New Zealand
        Tonga
        Samoa
        Atlantic Qualifier (USA)

        Pool C – Played in the UK/Ireland
        England
        Scotland
        Ireland
        Wales

        Pool D – Played in Spain & Russia
        France
        Russia
        Eastern Euro Qualifier (Serbia)
        Western Euro Qualifier (Germany)

        Then for finals have the top 2 from each group assemble somewhere like South Africa, USA, Japan, Germany, Russia, Italy etc. to play quarters, semis and a final.

        A1 Australia V D2 Russia
        B1 NZ V C2 Wales
        C1 England V B2 Samoa
        D1 France V A2 PNG

        Then the losing teams play for a Shield to save them travelling for one game and the 4 winners progress to the Cup semi’s.

      • druzik says:

        2 years is too often, it just doent give teams time to go and do other things and to rebuild as it often happnes after WC’s… 4 years is good still.

        However that idea you have com up with has some good merit to it. It’s an interesting and different way at having the tournament which is good.

      • Jim says:

        The problem with 4 years for a junior World Cup though is that Juniors don’t stay juniors. What about players that come through in between the 4 years?

        Alot to ask every two years but that’s why I think we should build towards it, start with something like Ryan suggested a 6 Nations, at junior level the 6 nations he named would all be competitive. Some of the teams I named might be flat out getting a junior team up anytime soon which is why we should build towards it.

      • druzik says:

        Good point… yes you are completely right on that points… I didn’t factor that. :s

  2. Jon says:

    Today was a day that just made me despair. Rugby union internationals in the morning, football in the afternoon and evening. Supposed rugby league fans coming out with their excuses for not going to, and in some cases not even watching, the England v France rugby league match. A very disappointing crowd at Leigh and at this very moment in time I have little to no confidence in the RFL, international rugby league and many of my fellow rugby league supporters.

  3. Ryan says:

    In regards to the Junior World Cup, I think it would be just too big and impossible to co-ordinate at the current time.

    I would advocate a 6 Nations Under 18s tournament featuring Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, England, Wales and France. All these countries could potentially host the tournament, therefore they would have to put forward a proposal to the RLIF. These nations will be somewhat competitive against each other at this age level, providing juniors with more experience in international tournaments, and also develop the nations future competitiveness, thus eventually resulting in us having 6 relatively strong Rugby League nations in the not so distant future.

    • druzik says:

      Well we have managed to have in 2008 a Mens WC, womens WC, Studnets WC and Police world Cup… so I dont see why we cant somehow work around it so that we have a junior world cup. It may be that games run in parrallel with the main games, have the WC at the same time as the regular WC?

      • Ryan says:

        Where would the junior player base come from for teams to compete against the superior junior systems of Australia, New Zealand, England and even France.

        Sure you could select Pacific Island players that are playing in Australia, but they have been developed in the Australian system from what was probably a young age, and eventually State of Origin could factor in their careers and the country they played for when they were 18 or 19 won’t factor against the “pinnacle” that Origin is. The developing European nations are too far behind, and the USA doesn’t even have a serious junior system in place.

        That’s why I think the 6 Nations idea would be better, because it would make these six teams more competitive and avoiding potentially big score lines, and that also these six nations are generally the best at senior level (professional teams etc.) but there still remains a large gap between the top three and the rest in senior internationals (and Australia and the rest, created by our bigger junior system).

        So it could eventually help the top six nations become more competitive against each other. At the same time other juniors national teams should be playing, and the gap between tournaments gives these teams a chance to tour or host friendly internationals against better sides. Giving the weaker nations time to bring their juniors up to scratch, rather than throw them in with the big guys.

      • druzik says:

        You would think that there would be some development in each of the countries for the juniors? I know that in Europe there is an emphasis in many countries on this. Get the U14-u16 coming through and develop the national comps and teams long term.

        I am sure the PI nations are the same. Fiji and Tonga I know have comps right down to u14s.

        I see your points Ryan… but we need to start getting the u19 etc… starting to respect the international more… have them valued above SoO.

  4. Cheyne Maher says:

    This is a fantastic concept Dan. A series of international 7’s or 9’s tournaments would strengthen Rugby League in Europe and the South Pacific and greatly assist in spreading the game around the world.

    I agree that having recently retired players involved would be brilliant, as it would help to promote such a series. Imagine the likes of Wendell Sailor, Hazem El Masri and Nigel Vagana turning out for Australia, Lebanon and Samoa respectively. To have such names, who aren’t tied down to an NRL club, running around for a couple of months at the start of the year would really capture the publics imagination.

    After reading your blog it got my imagination running and I came up with a few of my own thoughts on such a proposal, which I thought could be worth sharing with you and other readers.

    TIMING

    I would schedule the series as six separate tournaments, played over six consecutive weekends in January and February, as a lead in to the NRL/ESL season. This would allow the series to gather momentum and really whet the appetite of league fans for the domestic seasons, similar to how the All stars game did this year.

    Also, I feel a compact six week schedule would probably be the most attractive to potential players as they are only committed to travelling the world for a short period of time. While travelling all over the world would definitely be an attraction for the likes of Sailor and Co., most recently retired footballers are usually looking forward to more “family time”. It would also better suit part-time footballers too, who would need to get time off work to compete in the series.

    This would also allow Rugby League to have a presence basically all year around, except for December, which is probably not a bad window to have a break in anyway. January-February would have the international 9’s circuit, March-September the domestic comps and October-November would be the window for International tournaments and qualifiers.

    +Note: Although I have proposed a six week schedule, I do like the idea of nine tournaments as you suggested, as it makes for an awesome marketing slogan – NINE PLAYERS A SIDE, NINE MINUTES A HALF, NINE TOURNAMENTS A SERIES. Perhaps it could be expanded to nine straight weekends and still just fit in between New Years Day and kick-off of the NRL to avoid the overlap and ensure maximum exposure?

    FORMAT

    I agree that it would be awesome to open up a 7’s or 9’s up to as many as 32 or even more countries and here is how I think it could happen sooner rather than later, whilst still providing thrilling, competitive tournaments for the fans.

    I would place 12 teams in division one, 12 in division two and if there was enough interest up to 12 teams in division three etc etc. There would be no limit to the number of teams this way and no need for qualifying tournaments as there would just be a promotion and relegation process in place at the end of each tournament (or the end of each series, although I prefer the former).

    I think 12 teams would ensure competitive matches as the likes of Fiji, Samoa, Scotland and Lebanon could no doubt compete with the likes of Australia, England and New Zealand in a 7’s/9’s format of the game.

    Each division would have three groups of four teams, with the top place teams playing in that divisions “Cup” finals, the second placed teams in that divisions “Plate” Finals and the third placed teams in that divisions “Bowl” Finals. This results in each team playing two games each on Day One and two games each on Day Two.

    The finals of each category would involve two semi-finals and then a third place play-off (for the loosers of the semi-finals) and a final (for the winners of the semi-finals). The looser of the Division One Bowl Third placed play-off, would be relegated to Division Two for the following tournament. They would be replaced by the winner of the Division Two Cup Final who would earn promotion. This ensures that the teams in the lower levels still have up to five chances to compete against the best 7’s/9’s teams in the world that year.

    All teams would still compete on the same points table, but the points are weighted. For example the winner of the Cup Final in Division One would receive 100 points, second would receive 99 (100-1, for one team in front of them) etc, so that the team who win the Cup in Division Two would receive 88 points (100-12, for 12 teams in front of them), the team which wins the Cup Final in Division Three would receive 76 (100 – 24, for 24 teams in front of them) and so on.

    Obviously these weightings could be adjusted, but with only one point separating each placing, it allows a team starting in Division 2 the opportunity to make up real ground on teams in Division 1 if they are good enough to be promoted and then perform in Division 1. Perhaps there could be bonus points for making and winning Cup finals etc.

    SIMULATED EXAMPLE OF DIVISION ONE

    It may seem pedantic but I have included kick-off times for each match. This is because one of the main concerns raised by those who are against such tournaments is the risk of injury due to players warming up and then cooling down several times over a weekend. As a personal trainer and former junior coach I understand this is a genuine concern, so I have come up with the following schedule, which shows that the longest time between one teams kick-off time in their first game and the finish time of their second game for each day is less than two hours (similar to an NRL match). Players could keep warm by riding bikes etc on the sideline, thus reducing this risk.

    DAY ONE (based on 9 minute halves, 2 minute half-time and 10 minute rest between games)

    GROUP A: 3:00 Australia v Ireland, 3:30 Ireland v Scotland, 4:00 Australia v Scotland
    (Standings Australia 4, Ireland 2, Scotland 0)

    GROUP B: 4:30 New Zealand v Wales, 5:00 Wales v Samoa, 5:30 New Zealand v Samoa
    (Standings Samoa 4, New Zealand 2, Wales 0)

    GROUP C: 6:00 PNG v France, 6:30 France v Tonga, 7:00 Tonga v PNG
    (Standings France 4, Tonga 2, PNG 0)

    GROUP D: 7:30 Fiji v England, 8:00 Lebanon v England, 8:30 Fiji v Lebanon
    (Standings Fiji 3, England 2, Lebanon 1)

    DAY TWO (based on 9 minute halves, 2 minute half-time and 10 minute rest between games)

    +Note winners mentioned first on finals day.

    BOWL FINALS: 3:00 Semi-final 1 Scotland v Wales, 3:30 Lebanon v PNG, 4:00 3rd place play-off PNG v Wales, 4:30 Lebanon v Scotland.

    PLATE FINALS: 5:00 Semi-final 1 Ireland v New Zealand, 5:30 England v Tonga, 6:00 3rd place play-off New Zealand v Tonga, 6:30 Ireland v England

    CUP FINALS: 7:00 Semi-final 1 Samoa v Australia, 7:30 Semi-final 2 France v Fiji, 8:00 3rd place play-off Fiji v Australia, 8:30 Samoa v France.

    Obviously the lower divisions would need to be scheduled in somewhere too. Depending on how many divisions there were they could either be played earlier in the day at the same ground or perhaps at a different venue nearby. For the purpose of this example lets say USA beat Germany in the Division 2 Cup Final.

    STANDINGS AFTER TOURNAMENT ONE

    Samoa 100, France 99, Fiji 98, Australia 97, Ireland 96, England 95, New Zealand 94, Tonga 93, Lebanon 92, Scotland 91, PNG 90, Wales 89, USA 88, Germany 87 etc

    In this case USA would be promoted to Division One for tournament two while Wales would be relegated to Division Two. The same would occur at the bottom of Division Two and the Winner of Division Three etc.

    LOCATIONS

    As for the six locations that host a tournament in a series, well this is how I would arrange it. I would spread them throughout the world on a four year cycle.

    Each of the countries that qualify for a (13-a-side) World Cup would earn the right to host at least one tournament over the next four year cycle. I am not suggesting in any way that qualifiers for the 13 a side game World Cup play any role in seedings or qualification for the 7’s/9’s series. As stated before I would simply have as many divisions as necessary to accommodate any team who wishes to participate in the series, which has its own promotion and relegation system. I am only proposing this because I think it is those countries who qualify for a 13 a side World Cup, that would benefit the most from the double exposure of participating in a World Cup and hosting an international 7’s/9’s tournament.

    Lets say for example that once there is a more definite World Cup cycle that there is 16 teams in a World Cup. That means all 16 nations would host at least one tournament each over a four year cycle. That leaves a further eight tournaments over that period to be allocated, which, using any of the following methods, could be granted to a;

    “wild card” country at the RLIF’s discretion (eg. to a country where the RLIF is making a concerted effort to promote the sport or to a country which had performed particularly well in a 7‘s tournament the previous year)
    bidding country, such as the United Arab Emirates, which may increase funding for the sport
    country that is already hosting one of the tournaments, particularly the heartlands (there is no doubt Australia could make one tournament a year viable, spreading it throughout different cities on a rotating basis)

    The only stipulation I would place on this process is that both Europe and the South Pacific region host at least one tournament per year and that each continent hosts at least one per cycle, which could be achieved through the use of the wild cards. This way everyone shares in the excitement!

    NUMBERS??

    Finally I also agree with you in leaning slightly towards 9’s as opposed to 7’s. I think 9’s is more conducive to a sport better suited to a wider range of Rugby League players, as opposed to 7’s which would be more dominated by the “speedsters”. 9’s would also distinguish our circuit from Rugby’s 7’s, although I’m not sure if this would really matter? On the other hand 7’s might be more viable as it involves less players travelling etc.

    Whether there is 7, 9 or even if we met in the middle at 8 a side, I think Rugby Leagues’ product sells itself and would ensure a brilliant spectacle to fans around the world, so I will leave the exact number of players up to others to debate.

    Wow I just realised how long this is. Hopefully it makes sense. Feel free to critique it. Cheers Cheyne

    • druzik says:

      Wow that is pretty impressive… yes that could work what you have there… really the 9’s opens up a whole new way fo promoting the game, there certainly can be many ways of doing it… I like P&R you have provides a bit of extra incentive…. I guess the only thing is how would you do the initial rankings in 7s/9s to set up the divisions?

      But yeah… that is a great set up I think.

      • Cheyne Maher says:

        Thanks, i realised after i sent that post that i made a mistake under the format heading (i wrote three groups of four teams, instead of the other way around, buti figure you would have understood it via the example).

        I hadn’t really thought of how to split the initial season’s divisions up, which now that you mention it, is a pretty important factor. If the first season doesn’t produce a quality series, with too many blow out scores, the whole concept might get the boot before it really establishes itself.

        Maybe one way is to hold a one-off tournament or a series of qualifiers for any interested team to establish a set of 7’s/9’s rankings prior to starting it off.

        Another method could be to simply use the RLIF rankings from the 13 a side game. This should at least ensure Division One was fairly competitive as you would think the top 12 from this list would provide good competition from the outset as they all have Rugby League already established in the homelands.
        If there was a team outside of this top 12 that was clearly a better 7’s/9’s outfit than the original Division One teams, which is quite possible, they should rise to the top after a couple of tournaments any way.

        The more i think about this concept the better i think it is. This is definetely something the RLIF should be looking to introduce in the next three to four years.

        Keep up the awesome work with the blogs Dan!

      • druzik says:

        I think everyone could work out what you were saying 🙂

        So yes initially I thought that going by the XIII rankings would be the way to go, but I think that may be flawed since some of the PI nations actually meay be better than the traditional powers in the 9s… maybe as a start.

  5. Dave says:

    rugby doesn’t use old and semi-retire players in the irb circuit. they use un and coming and under 20 players.

    • druzik says:

      OK, I stand corrected. Thank you.

      But my general point I stand by, that in RL to generate the interest we need to use a couple stars that may be close to or have retired… in the initial years anyway till the 9’s get a profile built up.

  6. dragons4eva says:

    Well when the World 7’s were on Pacific Islander nations could compete and even beat NRL and Australian teams. I think one year PNG made it to the final against Canberra. Plus 9’s would not only help develop local and up coming talent, but be another alternative to teams and individuals to play in.

    Fiji in Rugby are GUNS at 7’s however lack talent in the 15 man game. 9’s could show countries’ individuals ‘flair’ and be a really crowd puller. I reckon some GREAT nations would be like Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, PNG, South Africa and Jamaica.

    • druzik says:

      The biggest issue for many of those smaller nations in both League and Union is fitness…. in 9s you dont have to be so worried about your fitness and there is also unlimited interchange in them, so they can run hard and play hard.

      But I agree they are another great option to have.

  7. stevec says:

    All great points but, unlike most here, I do wonder about the team numbers. From 13 down to 9 seems like “RL Lite” as opposed to the RU version of 15 down to 7. Early on it was stated that small (9’s) squads would make this more viable and surely 7 (with interchange) is an even more easily manageable number.

    OK there is possibly the argument that the product will not be differentiated enough from the RU circus (7’s RU spends little or no time on line outs, mauls and rucks) but the counter argument is that there might be interest in this, and ultimately the full 13-a-side game, from the many younger players on the RU 7’s circuit.

    • druzik says:

      Well it is RL lite, you are correct there… but I think that is the point, no? That 9s is close enough to the XIII game to get people hooked in, while at the same time is not at player intensive and so thinks like tournaments can be run over a day or weekend. 7s in either the XIII or XV version is just too small, it makes a mockery of either code IMHO. 9s is just right.

      Things in Europe are starting to get to the point where more and more players are coming just to play League and are not converts from Union… there will always be that crossover but we see now in countries like Serbia, Czech Republic, Ukraine and Germany clubs that are only XIII clubs and only have XIII players with no XV experience. You can actually see the difference in play. So I am not sure how much cross over there will be from RU 7s to RL 9s… some but not a huge amount… the two still are fundamentally different enough I feel.

      But good points you made.

  8. C.T.SANDERS says:

    JUNIOR WORLD CUP IS A WASTE OF TIME AS WELL AS RESOURCES

  9. C.T.SANDERS says:

    THERE SHOULD BE A UNDER 85 KILOGRAM WORLD CUP SO WE CAN INTRODUCE THE GAME INTO THE ASIAN AND AFRICAN MARKETS AND IT WOULD ALSO BE A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR EVERYONE.RUN PARALLEL TO THE PROPER WORLD CUP IT WOULD BE SENSATIONAL.WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT DANIEL??WORTH A PUNT AND ONCE MORE WE COULD BEAT RUGBY TO THE PUNCH.

    • druzik says:

      No, many of the Asian and African players are very big actually, and the sport will natury bring in a certain type of body build. I dont mind having age divisions, but weight division would not make any sense. Once again that would create a have and havenots division. If there is a team that jas predominantly smaller players then they can never get a run at the others. Sometimes the smaller teams can be better than a team with large lumbering players.

  10. C.T.SANDERS says:

    WEIGHT DIVISIONS HERE IN NEW ZEALAND IS SAVING NEW ZEALAND RUGBY UNION FROM ACTUALLY DYING.CHINESE PEOPLE IN CHINA ARE ACTUALLY BIG PEOPLE,ESPECIALLY IN THE PROVINCES, AND THAT’S WHY THE AMERICANS INTRODUCED NBA BASKETBALL INTO CHINA IN THE 1970’s AND THE REST IS NOW HISTORY.THE KENYANS ARE BIG IN STATURE IN REGUARDS TO RUGBY UNION 7’S WHICH IS NOW AN OLYMPIC SPORT DESPITE THE FACT THAT RUGBY LEAGUE WAS PLAYED AT THE CHIlDREN’S OLYMPICS IN MOSCOW IN 1998 AND THE MAIN REASON WHY NEW ZEALAND RUBGY LEAGUE CAN’T PRODUCE WORLD CLASS STAND-OFFS OR SCRUM HALVES IN ABUNDANCE IS THAT THERE IS NO UNDER85 KILOGRAM GRADE HERE IN AUCKLAND FOR ADULTS OR OPEN AGE RESTRICTED PEOPLE.THAT IS WHY THE GAME STRUGGLES.RUGBY UNION IS TOYING WITH THE IDEA OF STAGING AN UNDER 85RUGBY WORLD CUP IN THE NOT-TOO-DISTANT FUTURE AND WATCH ONE SPORT PROGRESS[RUGBY UNION] AND THE OTHER STAGNATE[RUGBY LEAGUE].ISN’T THAT JUST TYPICAL OF RUGBY LEAGUE.JUST CAN’T THINK OUTSIDE THE SQUARE AND WHEN THEY JUMP ON THE BAND WAGGON LIKE THE NZRL DID IN 2004 IN REGUARDS TO RUSSIA THEY ALWAYS STUFF UP WHEN THEY SHOULD OF MADE HAY WHILE THE SUN WAS OUT.A GAME OF MANY MISSED OPPORTUNITIES.NO WONDER WE ARE ONLY A CINDERALLA SPORT.

  11. C.T.SANDERS says:

    9’s is a waste of time.Should be rugby league8’s because 7’s is one person too less and 9’s is one person too many and all 9’s is is barge,kick and yawn a broken down version of the 13 a side game which has become repetitious and boring.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Powered by Wordpress | Built by Thinking Cap Studios