The tournament will play host to 14 nations – taking place from October 26 to November 30 and will be broadcast in over 120 countries around the world. www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=19268 Critical to the successful delivery of the tournament will be the selection of appropriate host venues across the British Isles... So which venues will host the events?

The tournament will play host to 14 nations – taking place from October 26 to November 30 and will be broadcast in over 120 countries around the world. www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=19268 Critical to the successful delivery of the tournament will be the selection of appropriate host venues across the British Isles... So which venues will host the events?

If they have any sense Wigan, Warrington and Leeds. Anywhere else would see 3,000 crowds as they won't market the event, the mass media will blank it out and people don't care about league in this country.

Just having the competition in this country is bizarre.

So bring it to OZ again if that's the case.

What about Hull????

What about rugby league 'fans' not writing of and denigrating their own sport?



Just a thought …

Agree....

It's not the case. RL fans watch RL, soccerball fans watch soccerball. We filled the two biggest stadiums in England for two club games in the last few months, this World Cup will be a belter.

even if it is snowing for the final

Bang on that. The grounds available are fantastic and will be even better for the RLWC. I expect sell outs for pretty much every game, as long as the RFL are sensible with their ticket pricing and the stadia chosen.

And promoting it properly.

You expect sell outs for pretty much every game? Whilst I understand criticism of my more prudent approach, your's is surely open to the same?

I missed Hull and St Helens from the list of attractive venues in terms of crowds. Realistically Wigan, Hull, Warrington, Leeds, St Helens would be the list of locations. Do you notice anything about them?

Even in those heartlands the 'no big teams' games wouldn't do well. For example France versus Samoa. Where is that going to sell out? PNG versus Fiji?

Although the idea of a league world cup is appealing to us, it doesn't translate to actual people attending these games.

We can't even sell out the likes of the JJB and Reebok for international series against Australia and NZ. What chance do we have of making effective dead rubbers involving those sides sell out? There will always be a soft team in the group with the big boys and if they didn't adopt that approach it would mean even more one sided games.

prudent? You might want to look the word up in a dictionary.

Don't underestimate the pulling power of Test football with plenty of planning and marketing - see the 14k+ crowd in Avignon for France v Ireland on Saturday for reference.
In the "disastrous" 2000 World Cup, every game played in France, including those not involving France, was played in a full venue. I was privileged to be in a nearly 20k crowd for Wales v NZ at the Millennium Stadium, as well as a 35k+ crowd at Twickers and a 45k ish crowd at the Final.
Games involving Tonga at Wilderspool and PNG in Hull from the 1995 World Cup are probably still talked about - and they were played in front of decent crowds. Don't forget two massive Wembley clashes with Australia, the classic semi final at Huddersfield, and a heaving Central Park for England.
Only England and France disappointed in the 2008 World Cup - the games involving the "lesser" nations were great spectacles - what Tests should be like!
Get the right venues - tighter geography than 2000 - a Wembley final with years of notice - and this could be more successful than 1995.

Come on. The profile of the international game here is pretty poor. No one in this country believes we can be competitive with Austraila and at the moment we cannot. Previously international series, including those against superstar packed Australia and NZ sides still haven't sold out.

Realistically there is no way they can organise a well attended world cup in this country in that time frame. Apart from the heartlands, possibly a game in South Wales and one in London there are no other venues than the usual Northern ones. Even those would struggle to sell out a game.

I was at the Tonga v NZ at Wilderspool and i've never seen that ground fuller. I remember some cracking crowds for the Emerging Nations World Cup too.

I also enjoyed the use of 'prudent' in the OP. I'd have used 'negative'.

I was at the Tonga v NZ at Wilderspool and i've never seen that ground fuller. I remember some cracking crowds for the Emerging Nations World Cup too.

I also enjoyed the use of 'prudent' in the OP. I'd have used 'negative'.

NZ v the cook islands on a tuesday night in reading was never ever going to work

Better than playing a World Cup Final in the dark, like they did in cricket.

Or an AFL Grand Final that ends in a draw.

I'm pretty sure that the RFL will be doing plenty to promote 2013. They won't want another catastrophic failure of an event on their hands (again). They need to especially play off this golden decade of sport stuff.

This new towns and cities bidding thing they are doing could be very helpful. The RFL should seek assurances that any city who will be hosting games or a group is willing to do a lot of marketing themselves and gurantee a healthy attendance.

That is the interesting part. They have confirmed that 14 teams will take part. That is 4 more than in Australia, further increasing the number of games and also the potential for mismatches, blown out scores and a farce.

You have Australia and NZ who are a massive problem. Do you keep them in a group with England and sacrifice another decent side like they did in the past or do you put them in seperate groups and increase the number of one sided games?

How do you plan a world cup that can maximise exposure in a football saturated time of the year? Playing at weekends would seem to be the better bet, but as mentioned a game between NZ and the Cook Islands wouldn't get a decent billing with a full football calendar.

People are also overestimating the heartlands severely. I can remember watching England play at Knowsley Road and there were about 5,000 people there. I watched a game involving Australia in Hull and there were 3,000 there. Unless the fixtures are attractive people will not turn up.

It's a logistical nightmare. How do you achieve competitive games that are timed and located well with no media involvement due to the football and the disparity in the quality of the 14 teams?

By 2013 there should be a few new stadiums to host games in.
Saints
Cas


Salford
maybe even Wakey


The keepmoat is also a nice stadium, and hudds is also relatively new.

The only question for me is do we have to have any matches outside the heartland? A trade off of poor crowds (for matches in london etc) for potentially a bit more publicity.

Everyone accepts that 2000 was a poor world cup with games in stupid places. However, just five years earlier



[url=http://www.rugbyleagueplanet.com/RLP/Worldcup/1995worldcup.htmsource[/url

Are we really saying we can't do that again?

Of course we can do it again. I'd let Wales play at Wrexham and France in France after their great crowd at the weekend. Don't think that's the plan though. If NZ play Australia have it at The Stoop or Loftus Rd.

It may be an increase to 14 teams, but I think the format will be similar to the laswt WC where the groups were organised to stop landslides and keep the games competitive.

We need to hold the group games as close to each other as possible for example
Group 1 DW and saints
Group 2 kc n craven park (if its in better state than today)
Group 3 Cas (if they have got a new ground)and doncaster
Group 4 wire and salford

Iv used grounds we should reallistcally sell out not too big just the right size IMHO

Semi-final double header at elland rd
Final city of manchester stadium/Old trafford

I havnt been biased there by staging more games in lancashire hence thats why elland rd got a double header.