Well no, because that would leave out the part where you admit it was wrong to say that RL is stronger than RU in the southern hemisphere.

Apart from JB, does anyone else think that the mindblowing number of people who watch the NRL on T.V. in Australia would hold any sway with the IOC, if RL was to put forward an application for consideration for possible inclusion in future Olympic games. Or do we think the fact it is only played in a small number of countries where it tends to play second fiddle to the dreaded Union outweigh this somewhat.

I only ask this in relation to the original question (RL at the Olympics) which appears to have got lost as everyone went off on one big style.

We've got no chance BP.

Ru must be ing themselves at Australias abandonment of the rl international game.

Nah, but they do laugh at the fact we (English Rugby League) struggle to sell out GB/ England Internationals in the North of England.

You want to blame ppl for abandoning teh International game..forget about the ARL/ NRL and start with the fans who just cba to attend, before making your way to the clubs who imported players from the Southern Hemisphere because its easier, quicker and cheaper than developing the declining pool of British talent...

As to BP1s question...no, it prolly won't mean a thing to the ioc or its president.

Just like Australia do in Sydney.


Is it because they can't be d to attend? Or is it because the international game is so poorly organised and administered that we don't know when and where games are until a few months before and as such the game is perceived as not that important? Who administers the international game again?


How is it declining? Do explain that one...


Which is why the Aussies need to stop being so bloody insular and realise that the game will be better with decent international competition as well as realising that Australia is not only not the centre of the universe, it's not actually that significant.

Cool, so RLfans prefer to support their Clubs rather than Internationals...which is something JB suggested previously.


Riight...so you had NFI the end of season International comp would be at...the end of the season...excuses, excuses.


Why, did they personally stop you from attending by barring your front door or nicking your bus pass?


Awwww, You dont really believe the participation numbers, do you?




We took the International against *Wales to the LSV...Its not the Aussies who are insignificant.

If you want International Rugby League to be successful and have some relevance again in [ithis [/iCountry, stop crying about the Aussies and start using the forum and social media to build the damm things up...or accept that the real interest is in the club game and bring back the World Club Series in some form.

*Edit

From page 7 of this thread...


I never stated Union was more popular than League in Australia....why would I say that when it wouldn't be true?

What has happened here JB is that you have made yourself look a class A idiot by chasing your tail in the forlorn hope that the self declared defenders of the RL faith will ride to your rescue and bully anyone who dares disagree with you into submission.....
Even when the error of your ways was pointed out to you by others, you continued to press ahead, adding new levels of stupidity to your CV......and now, once you realise that you are in the wrong, you attempt to make this all about "gutterfax".....jesus christ man, only a fruitloop doesn't know when he's been beaten and continues to swing.....and believe me, you have been beaten here

But there isn't a problem?
Sure if the NRL is all that is cared about it can stand on its own, but don't be surprised when it is overtaken by multinational sports with global funding. This then screwing RL over due to direct competition in both viewing figures and playing salaries

Joey, the Australian's pulled out of a international series, no one else.

I know mate, and I know ppl are ed(and rightly so) but that doesnt explain not selling out Elland Road for last yrs final or the poor 44k for the Wembley dbl header...and thats without checking out attendance from 2009 etc.

We want International competition goes the cry, but we then find all sorts of excuses to not support it...If it doesnt mean anything the fans, why should the multi nationals care enough to invest in the sport?

Agree 100% jd.....RL need to up its game on the exposure and Marketing fronts.....the RLWC 2013 could go either way as it stands....there are 2 double headers planned.....both should look to be sell outs....anything less than a Full Wembley for the double header semis will be a disgrace.....chances are that same weekend, the other lot will be playing to a packed Twickenham crowd.

No, what JB said earlier was that RL doesn't need an international game.
RL fans prefer to support their club sides because at the moment they play in a better structured and organised competition with more exposure.


For some reason you seem to be assuming that I don't go to internationals? I went to all the England games last year, mate. But your typical RL fan doesn't have the same attachment to the game as me and it would be foolish to schedule games in such a way given our small amount if support in this country.

End of season internationals are at the end of the season. Well done. What day? What time? Where? You do realise the longer you leave these things, the more chance your average person is going to have made other plans (or been dragged by his missus to some do)? People aren't just going to leave their weekends free. Schedules need announcing early, tickets released earlier and marketing done in advance.

The RL public are apathetic, but that's for a reason, and if the folk at the RLIF (and ARL/RFL) keep scheduling games because of this apathy instead of addressing the reasons for this apathy, the international game won't grow. They've made a good start with the RLWC, but in doing so have completely left out this year's series.


I believe that when you invest £29m of Sport England money into developing grassroots sport, it kind of makes an increase in participation believable. But you be a cynic if you like, and you talk down the game based on no evidence whatsoever. That's a great argument you've got there.


Not *just* the Aussies, but I agree in the point (as mentioned earlier).


It's up to the marketers of the game to come up with campaigns, not the fans. RL is a business, not a charity. Businesses have a loyal base of customers. So does RL. But you cannot rely solely on those customers. You need to be making new ones all the time, and that is up to the business.

RL will not survive in word-of-mouth marketing.

Had to happen eventually




Bit unfair to hand out the failure stickers just yet gf, tho I’d def agree attendance at the Millennium Stad dbl header on the 26th October 2013 will prolly decide how the rest of the comp is perceived by the wider media...Its up to the fans...the dates and venues have been announced and ticks go on sale a full yr out from the start of the comp...If the fans really want a successful International comp, this is where it starts!




and you were going so well...

BAck to the OP,

There is no reason a long term plan could not see RL nines played at the Olympics (I know we don't do long term in RL but still).

First step is to get it in the C'wealth games. To do that we need:
regular club IX's in held in C'wealth different countries (good to see SL starting the ball rolling with this years nines tournament)
a pre season world IX's held in Australia in Jan/Feb

there should be no reason then why it isn't seen as a legitimate variation of RL and held as part of the games. Here are the C'wealth countries where RL is played and could put out Int teams:

Australia
Canada
Jamaica
NZ
PNG
Samoa
South Africa
Tonga
GB
Malta

A 10 team comp should be more than enough to get it started,
On top the game is just starting up in these countries and a C'wealth Nines would be a great vehicle to further the game for them
Singapore
Solomon Islands
Pakistan
Ghana

Assumptions based on your replies and I apologise If I misinterpreted them.

The bolded part of your post is interesting....If typical fans have no attachment to Internationals then perhaps, as I believe JB was suggesting, the time has come to rethink?


Excuses, excuses...which fail to hide the fact that the end of season Internationals have, since 2004, been played on roughly the same dates every other year (WC yrs excepted).


Again Wellsy, knowing the SH based RLif is madder than a bag of ferrets, does not stop ppl from attending and supporting Internationals played in [ithis [/iCountry...you want to send a msg to love and his crew? Pack the bigger UK stadia out and create interest....they will follow the dollars and media lights.


Not an argument, just an...observation. Sport England invested far more £’s in grassroots union...How did their participation rates trend? Tho, admittedly union has a very long history of falsifying numbers.

Are the Sport England figures still based on a telephone survey every six months? This was discussed on another forum and (going from memory) the consensus was the methodology was somewhat....flawed


New customers to increase your ‘loyal’ fan base across two hemispheres who prefer the club game to Internationals..


Its the year 2012...with one click of a mouse in his poster strewn basement gf can hit up ‘000s of =#FFFFFFunsuspecting marks potential future consumers...I’m not suggesting replacing the more traditional marketing and ad campaigns btw, but to suggest that existing fans have no part to play is, to me anyway, a bit daft.
From the Arctic Monkeys to Joseph(no relation) Kony, grassroots social media can and does influence behaviour...Compare the constant negativity of this thread with the similar Rugby League and the olympics thread on planet puntmunkey...its kinda hard to tell the difference.

GB don't play in the Commonwealth games. It would be England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. There's three more nations for you right there.

The bolded part would be more interesting if you read it correctly. I never said "no attachment", I said "not the same attachment".
The same attachment isn't there because of the poor organisation and structure of international RL. People are not going to readily invest their emotion behind something if they do not know what's happening year on year. International RL lacks credibility.


Roughly the same date isn't enough. People need to know the exact dates! It's p*ss poor organisation to not have released the KO times of an international tournament when it starts in 2 months! This is why people don't buy into it, and why people don't waste their time.


You won't pack out stadia if the competition is lacking credibility. The responsibility starts at the top. You don't produce cr*p and then blame the customer for not buying it. You blame the producer!


Union has always had a lot of money invested by Sport England. League just got a HUGE increase. That's where the significant difference come in.
On top of which, I'm more concerned with the numbers playing in the SL. Are there or are there not more English players in the SL now than there were 10 years ago?


They prefer it for a reason. The reason is more subliminal than they will realise.


It is daft. That's why I never said it.
I said you can't rely solely on it. Not in sport. And not top level international sport.

JB, forget about olympic recognition, it won't happen while rogge is there.

If Rugby League wants in the Commonwealth Games, then it needs to work on getting RL nines played in the requisite (35 of 71 according to the unionites) number of Commonwealth Countries to allow optional status to be granted..12 or 13 countries just wont be enough for anything other than Exhibition/ Recognised status mate.

The creation of a fully sponsored World Nines series should be on the list...but it needs to be more than a pre season party...

Don't understand why you need 31 countries when you would probably only invite 10-15 teams to compete in the games. For example hockey is a c'wealth game yet only ten teams compete in the games.

Actually just looked at the cgf constitution for sports inclusion and there is no specific number of countries needed to be accepted as a core or optional sport. Marketability, performance and participation are key factors. I suspect the union old boys network is a far stronger reason they are a core sport than any notion of participation levels. Page 31: www.thecgf.com/about/constitution.pdf

Actually just looked at the cgf constitution for sports inclusion and there is no specific number of countries needed to be accepted as a core or optional sport. Marketability, performance and participation are key factors. I suspect the union old boys network is a far stronger reason they are a core sport than any notion of participation levels. Page 31: www.thecgf.com/about/constitution.pdf

Its to do with the status the CG awards to sports...Theres three Catogories, Recognised, Optional and Core. As far as I can see, each 'edition' of the CG has the 10 Core Sports and 7 (from 15) optional Sports....If the game is serious about being included on a semi regular basis, then changing RL9's status from Recognised to Optional is the next step.

And to do that, 9's would need to be played in 31 CG Countries...is how I'm reading it. Tho have to 'fess up and admitt I'm going off a combination of a union forum and wiki...

Why would 9's be considered for the Olympics? It's hardly played apart from the second string tournament in the UK. It doesnt compares with 7's in terms of its global reach and number of tournaments.

There is no specific number of countries in the eligibility criteria for a sport to be included.

It wouldn't and shouldn't now but there is no reason that we could not have a long term plan to get it in. The benefits would be massive and nines is actually a good development opportunity for the code.

How exciting would this backline be to watch?

Fiji
1 Hayne
2 Keven Naiqama
3. Wes Naiqama
4. Koroibete
5. Uate