...but true.
[urlhttp://www.bbc.com/sport/rugby-league/41907318[/url

I think the Aussies have bust a got for this world cup. Top notch sponsorship for starters "$2.5 gravy and chips" plastered all over the pitch. lol. Not bad from a multi million sport

Should be mushy peas as well to properly reflect RL's north of England origins.

Aussies are just descendants of northern parochial RL fans ! insular swines. Thats what living on a island in the middle of the Asia region does to you.

There shouldn't be another WC in Australia. Crowds terrible, interest minimal. Play it in countries that actually want to watch it.

We have all known this to be the case so it's nothing really new if we are being honest.

The NRL created this with the success of origin. The big problem is that the rest of the world are pretty much held hostage by Australia in regards to international rugby league. Even if there was a desire for a bigger international calendar by other nations, the NRL will always be an obstacle.

Plus the whole issue of players having to commit to Australia if they want to play origin. Causing the smaller nations becoming weaker. This for a team that is doing all it can to minimise international rugby league matches. you couldn't make it up! Australia want all the best players but at the same time they want less international games.

Kear may be right, but as somebody who has a has heavy influence on talent development and on improving the product on the field in the northern hemisphere over the thick end of two decades, he's part of the problem.

You can't expect the Australian public to buy into international rugby if there is nobody who looks capable of competing with them.

The Euro nations have largely been disappointing in this WC - why would anyone but the most ardent purist want to hand over their cash to watch France, Wales, Scotland or Ireland?

Could the physical size of the country have anything to do with it? After all the individual states of Australia are larger than many countries. Could it be that the natives feel part of their state first and Aistralian second?

I've posted elsewhere, but in short let NZ host 3 pools and have one in PNG.
3 X Double headers in PNG or 6 Stand Alone fixtures there if they feel they could sell them and the rest in NZ.......the 3 host nations so far have:
PNG Average 14,500 (capacity) for 3 games
NZ Average 18,000 (75%) for 4 games
Australia Average bloody awful and there's no excuse for it.....8,800 or so......take their 3 games out and the average is 6.5k (allowing for double headers)....that's a disgrace!

Not a problem in cricket, rugby union or football

..or basketball where NZ Breakers have just Played the Perth outfit in Auckland and are then jumping on a plane to perth for the return fixture 3 days later.....8.5 hour flight over 5,400 kms!
Attendances in Townsville, Canberrra, Cairns have been shocking and why play at the SFS when somewhere like Leichhardt or Shark Park would have sufficed?
I'd never let the arrogant crims host another RLWC

They are insular when it comes to rugby league, but it's symptomatic of a number of issues.

Imagine england playing a tournament with just Scotland, wales, France, ireland. Would we get huge crowds? No. That's the equivalent to Australia. We are to them what Wales are to us, cannon fodder who we'll beat 99/10.

The heritage thing, it doesn't help when most of the southern hemisphere teams are made up of players born in Australia, they are basically playing against their z teams.

Someone said John Kear was part of the problem with NH teams. Nah, the problem is money, Irish have 30 dollars a day allowance, the rest comes out of the players pocket. 30 is nothing, cost of living in Aus is a joke, only good thing about that country is the weather.