My opinion only but releasing players isn't the reason we don't have more internationals. It's because the international game is poor. No matter how much we try and exspand there are only 3 international teams of quality. There is no demand for international games, the only internationals worth watching were the GB tours, and I cannot see that changing anytime in my lifetime whatever is done.

If Currie is worthy of one, why not Stevie Ward?

Maybe he is? I'm not sure the list stops at just those three. Like I said in the OP, Watkins and Hall would be strong candidates from us if so.

If Leeds & GH didn't know about this happening then I imagine we'll be hearing from him pretty soon in the YEP. If he doesn't say anything then likely we have players receiving the same too.

It isn't the only reason but it is a reason. the international window is tiny currently.

as for there not being the demand, compare and England international to an SL game. compare their viewing figures. The demand is comparatively huge.

Only if we play Australia and NZ and you can't just keep repeating that game over and over. If we play Wales, France or Scotland it'd be played somewhere like HKR because they wouldn't get enough of a crowd at larger venues.

England's last not aus/ NZ games were Scotland 21k. France 14k(in france) France 8k, France 22k, Fiji 25k, Ireland 24k.

Yeah World Cup games and a Four Nations double header with Aus vs NZ tells a clearer story. Played in the middle of a season and if SL games are still going on they'd struggle. If Leeds are playing Saints on Friday how many do you think will also go to HKR or Doncaster on Saturday to watch England vs Wales?

Not central contracts according to this & the payments go straight to the players, therefore, do not impact on the cap: www.loverugbyleague.com/news_247 ... ogram.html

Not central contracts according to this & the payments go straight to the players, therefore, do not impact on the cap: www.loverugbyleague.com/news_247 ... ogram.html

Yeah I'm not advocating a tily organised, poorly marketed, half d friendly in the middle of a season, played in some small northern stadium so I'm not sure of the relevance of your question.

But the argument is that players should be released from club duties DURING the season. And you can go book Old Trafford or St James Park for England vs Ireland if you want.....let see how full it would be.

more full than any of the awfully attended middle 8 games and we changed our whole system to invent those .

What relevance does that have in a debate about players being released for mid-season internationals?

And the reality is Leeds vs Batley last year got much more than a England vs Wales/Scotland/Ireland/France game would get played mid season alongside league fixtures.

leeds v batley got a lower attendance than the last time England played Scotland or Ireland and only got a couple of hundred more than the last time England played france. In France. this despite being included on the season tickets.p

Yes and as pointed out that Ireland game was a World Cup game, wouldn't get anywhere near that number outside of World Cup and Scotland game was a double header with Aus vs NZ. So very inaccurate portrayal of what those games would get played in the time period suggested previously.

so what your saying is that international attendances for well planned, well marketed international competitions far outstrip all SL attendances and massively outstrip the crappy 8s attendances.

I agree. More well planned, well marketed international games is a great idea. we don't need the poorly planned, barely marketed international games in some northern backwater or the atrocious 8's like some idiot said earlier