Or why not have with 16 teams in the first place.

For me they should have gone with 16 teams even if the 2 other sides had of been hammered.

I watched the Scotland game with a friend who was new to rugby league he enjoyed the game but thought the 3 team groups with teams playing a game against a side in the other group was a farce but hey ho

Well done Scotland fingers crossed

The way US have performed in this Tournament has surprised me and to be beaten by them in the qualifiers may not be as bad as all that. So for me Lebanon and Jamaica to make it up to 16 teams. Imagine watching Jamaica with waccy baccy fumes all round lol.

I've enjoyed Groups C and D, close games in front of big crowds and no teams getting battered by the likes of Australia, worked well in my opinion.

Here here.

Moaning for moaning's sake.

Cross group games are nothing new. We've had them in the Trains before now.

Personally, I thought it was a good solution. If you have four teams in those groups, with only one qualifier, you're likely to be stuck with a few meaningless games at the end.