I understand the big issue is getting the NRL to give up its players for 4 games a season, however I don't see why the 4/5 Nations here can't take place.

I'd also dispute that a nation like Scotland is making progress. After the World Cup no-one knows when Scotland's next top tier game will be. The same goes for every other 2nd tier nation.
Union have very much shown us how to develop an international game. We need an annual top tier comp guaranteed. Only then will 2nd tier nations have the ability to grow and develop in my opinion. And not just in terms of playing strength but also in terms of supporter base and media profile.

Brilliant move. Always loved the GB brand and know the Aussies respect it too. The second tier nations should still get their chance but we can't ignore the fact things were better when we were GB.

I agree with most comments above.

Great Britain is our point of difference. Its our brand and our identity. I think we'd sell out more grounds on British soil playing as GB than we would England. But this news is at least a good compromise. I can see the logic in retaining England as its own entity to develop the World Cup and IRL as a whole. We can't have England 'A' or England Knights playing full Tests against the other home nations. I suppose if we reverted to GB for all Tests that are not part of a World Cup, we could just omit England or the Knights from playing any proper Tests altogether, but its just messy.

BTW - the two comparative logos say all you need to know about GB vs England.

I didn't like the change to England, but it seems a bit pointless to change it now I'm getting used to it. Its also a bit more honest than GB nowadays (and what happens if Scotland leaves?). BTW I don't think the Aussies respect GB any more than England - they think we're rubbish and easily beatable whatever name is on the shirt.

It's an utterly ridiculous move that does nothing but change a shirt and a badge.

The Aussies will still call us England, like the did when we were GB.
The Irish don't want to be involved. GB isn't including any part of Ireland (and they rarely call it GB&I). They play GSTQ and wear union jack colours FFS!
GB isn't even a country.
All the work on the other home nations becomes secondary now. They are all effectively B teams.
You've basically reduced from 4 nations to 1 with no actual strengthening of the top nation as it will just be England under another name.
GB crowds in all the time I've watched rugby league have not been higher than England crowds have under the last 10 years, so this "it's a more sellable brand" doesn't cut it with me.

Basically, some old fart in power who has a yearning for yesteryear has tried to appease all the other old farts in the RL media with a yearning for yesteryear with this completely outdated concept of tours and GB.

This is the sort of backwards decision making that is really making me concerned about the future of RL in this country and the future of international rugby league. It's a good job the Aussies are getting their NRL right because otherwise we'd be absolutely nothing at the moment.

Fair enough, as a marketing move it has some appeal, there is a certain nostalgia for the GB brand. Unfortunately that nostalgia largely derives from when non-English "British" players could add real strength to the GB team e.g. Alan Tait, Paul Moriarty, John Devereux etc... How well that nostalgia will stand up to the reality of the England side touring under GB badge is another matter. As others have said we may need to look at Aussies and Kiwis of Scottish, Welsh and Irish ancestry; though there may be some good mileage in that. I suspect there may be some decent NRL players who are not going to get a gig for Australia or NZ who can't be bothered playing for a Tier 2 nation, but might see some cache in getting GB caps as there is still some nostalgia for same down under.

Spot on. It had been well over a decade since GB played at a 'big' stadium before the change to England. Games were at Wigan or Hull or Hudds with 20k. I know Wembley was out of action for a chunk of that period being rebuilt but there was still the likes of Old Trafford or The Etihad which they did try but couldn't sell out. People go on about it being a "recognisable brand" as if 'England' isn't. England (and Scotland, Ireland, Wales) seem to do just fine in RU, Football, Cricket as "brands"

Our historic, domestic cup final cannot sell out these day, so I very much doubt you'll find 72000 (excluding club wembley) RL fans to attend a game in London any time soon.

Also, why to Leeds and Wigan have some god given right to play the Aussies?

GF winner (and perhaps even the CC winners ) if the tourists want a warm up game.

3 tests, is venues of circa 40-50k capacity.

Market the nuts off it, including a DD scheme for season ticket holders of ALL clubs for tickets to all three games.

Christ, with the amount of deafeatist attitudes on here, some people could easily get a job in the RFL marketing dept.

I think they have that's why we never get any were we stand still when it comes to sell the game to the jo public

Any idea should have it's pros and cons thought through. Just because some aren't blinded by nostalgia to be unable to see the cons doesn't make them defeatist. Just because some think it'll work wonders doesn't make it fact, if it were then why don't those people go get jobs at the RFL and then the International game would be amazing because these guys said so with all their ideas.

Completely agree with this.

I think the attendance would be higher for an England game than it would be for a Great Britain game. Your die hard RL fan, that knows the two teams are identical will either go to both Eng and GB or go to neither. The general public who are not RL fans are much more patriotic about England than they are about Great Britain, and would be more likely to go to an England game in my opinion.

Sure the England brand does just fine in RU and so do Scotland Ireland and Wales, but, they aren't the biggest brand in the northern hemisphere are they?