Anyway guys, can someone do the math for me. I want to take a few family members to an England game but the pool stages are going to be blowouts, apart from the Aus game, which is in Wales(too far to travel)

The 3rd Quarter final isn't going to cut it against 3rd place in the b pool.

When England win that game, when will their next game be? (and who might they play?)

I want to buy tickets for a competitive England game that isn't in Wales, if possible.

If not we'll just buy tickets to the final

I can't speak for other posters, but I don't *want* any negatives to affect the game. However, it's not completely illogical to hold a view ( which you may vehemently disagree with ) that there are serious problems with the incumbent leadership and if some form of 'bad' news w.r.t. their performance ( not so bad as a failed WC I might add! ) helped to shift the people that some of us (rightly or wrongly) think are a big problem, then we might also believe (rightly or wrongly) it could be a small price worth paying leaving the game in a *better* state in the not-to-distant future. I've said previously, that its a horrible thing to have to say, and if there was a better way to see the back of them, I'd take it.

It might be hopelessly naive to believe this - you are entitled to think so - but it certainly doesn't stem from anything other than a love for the game I've paid to watch for 35 years ( and played for 18 ).

It happens all the time...imagine, I don't know, that you had a Formula One team but thought the chief mechanic was useless. You want a replacement because you think its the only way to challenge for a title. Problem is, he sometimes makes the car a little faster, and people say, " no, keep him, he's doing OK ", but you believe that despite the occasional improvement, he's fundamentally not good enough. You could easily conclude that you might be better off with a few mechanical breakdowns to get the guy moved on. As I say, could be hopelessly naive, and leave you with someone worse, but it doesn't make you bitter and pathetic, nor is it inconsistent with ultimately caring about the best long term interests.

My family are all football heathens who don't care for league, so even though any game could be a day out I want to take them to an England game that matters. I'm too drunk to do the finals maths.

The first England game would be great if not for the fact it's being played in Wales!

England v Fiji will be a competitive game.

The only thing more tragic than pessimistic fans/trolls are the ones who then act like martyrs confronted by a baying mob........more of this self importance thing again.

What do you think the 'serious problems' are?

I don't know. I mean, I'd buy that, but I'd rather England vs Aus or NZ in the finals. Or any Aus v NZ games.

I know with Finals games you never know but you kind of do because, lets be honest, Fiji aren't a real threat (I don't think)

Probably end up buying tickets at Wembley for the semis. Bit of a drive but w/e

I wouldn't give anything away until the last minute, but, if logistics allow a way to be able to fill seats a few days out if it looks like being a problem, then it might be a consideration. Don't get me wrong, the idea is laden with difficulty including 'why the heck is he getting in for free when I paid?' - that's why, if it has any legs at all, it could only feasibly be a last minute offer to public servants of some type.

If there are empty seats, I don't care who's 'fault' it is, nor am I complaining. I'm saying that *if* there's a prospect of lots of empty seats for a televised match, and there's some feasible solution near the day to help improve the image presented, I'd like to see it. It might not be needed, and it might be an impossibly daft idea. Either way, you need to calm down and realise that nowhere in this thread have I derided the tournament or ignored evidence.

By the way, did you attend the last swimming world championships? I just wondered, because whilst I know absolutely nothing about it, if they had any empty seats, it couldn't [ipossibly [/ibe in any way an issue to be looked at by the people that work in the sport, it could ONLY be the fans fault. Technically that makes it your fault too, because you didn't go. What's that you say? You're not a swimming fan? Oh, right, I thought the idea of world cup was to also attract new fans.

Let's make the consequences of your position clear: None of the bodies involved have ANY responsibility for selling tickets, marketing, or anything else - it is SOLELY the fault of the fans if there are any challenges at all with attendance.

you have said you would. its not completely illogical, it is however pathetic and childish, pointless and counter-productive.

Just jumping into the whole ticket sale conversation. Did anyone hear that the British and Irish Lions sold out the Aus tour in about 15 minutes?

I want to know how the f................k they did that!? According to most I know in Aus union is a non-entity. How did they still out so quickly, even taking into account the wealth of union fans?

I'm convinced they give away tickets recklessly. I know for club rugby that's what they do in England, just straight give away tickets to businesses.

Why not NZ v PNG at headingly, only £15 a ticket, should be a great game.

I'm perfectly calm, you've made numerous negative posts on this thread and now your sole suggestion is an ill-formed idea that you admit isn't very good. In that case why have you made so many negative posts on what was originally a positive thread?





I'm not a fan of swimming, I couldn't care less about their world championships. I certainly don't go on swimming forums and talk about how I expect their tournaments will be plagued by problems of empty seats.

If you claim to be an RL fan who wants the sport to succeed and then doesn't attend World Cup matches given the opportunity, then it's your fault if there are empty seats at the stadium. No doubt however that many alleged fans will find an excuse to not attend and then complain about the RFL regardless of the actual merits of the situation. I'm not sure why you felt the need to make up a ridiculous statement and attribute it to me, but certainly if you continually complain about empty seats at matches that haven't taken place yet and then don't attend, you are a hypocrite at best.

Fiji will probably have a stronger team than England did in 2008.

Where did I 'complain'? A poster in this thread pointed out that there would be empty seats at some games. I agreed with that.

Another poster asked what would the critics do differently. I have nowhere in this thread criticized the WC or the ticket sales. You're aware that I don't have much time for the RFL, so you're reading criticism where it isn't there, since you blindly assume every comment has the sole intention of 'being negative'. The problem with that lazy assumption ( as opposed to actual reading ) is that its self-reinforcing.

However, despite rejecting the label of 'critic' in this context, I gave the first thought that entered my head. If I had entered this thread saying "the RFL are doing the WC all wrong" it would be reasonable to demand a good idea from me. Since I didn't, I reserve my right to post half-d ones.

If you're saying "you have no right to criticize the RFL unless you go", I agree with you. ( The only plausible way someone could object to your point is the RFL had somehow made attendance particularly difficult or expensive. They haven't.)

However, I haven't criticized the RFL w.r.t. the WC and am attending several matches. Is that sufficient to get your permission for me to think-out-loud about those games which might have empty seats? Or is the mere mention of an empty seat just negative pathetic, anti-RL ranting that you won't tolerate?

So if you have no criticism of the RFL or the WC preparations up to this point, then why have you made numerous negative posts on a positive thread regarding WC ticket sales? Your initial contribution was that the tournament will be plagued by problems of empty seats, to the extent where the RFL would have to look at giving away tickets en-masse. If you think the RFL have done all the right things up to this point then what could possibly lead you to this conclusion? Why did you object to my assertion that empty seats would be the fault of the fans, surely if the RFL have done everything in their power and you still expect there to be empty seats then only one party is to blame for that?

You're free to do whatever you want, just don't expect not to be picked up on when you make bizarre, illogical posts, especially when you then claim to be a realist and that other posters are deluded for not agreeing with you.

1) I didn't realise threads were marked from the start as 'positive' or 'negative'. Next time someone starts a 'negative' thread, you'll promise not to post an opinion on it, right?

2) "So if you have no criticism of the RFL or the WC preparations up to this point, then why have you made numerous negative posts on a positive thread regarding WC ticket sales?": Difficult as this may be to comprehend, it is possible to express concern about empty seats, without implied criticism of the RFL or WC preparations. The poster to whom I first responded raised a sensible point ( I frankly don't care what 'type' of poster you think he is, or his posting history - I'm happy to read something on its own merits). The point being that we shouldn't be unaware of the likelihood that there'll be games with empty seats. Wishful thinking won't change this, so it's not the worst idea to think of solutions to the image problem that can create on TV. My 'solution' is no doubt a useless one, but hey. At no point have I said anything like "there'll be a load of empty seats because the RFL have messed it up".

3) "Why did you object to my assertion that empty seats would be the fault of the fans, surely if the RFL have done everything in their power and you still expect there to be empty seats then only one party is to blame for that?" False dichotomy. Has it never occurred to you that NOBODY might be to blame? Why are you obsessed with trying to guess who I'm blaming, or for that matter, blaming the fans yourself?. We are where we are - if you must blame someone for the fact that we probably won't sell-out every ground, where do you want to start? Pick anything or anybody starting with the RFU circa 1895.

Not saying that the tickets as they are wont sell, but as you asked....

No double header in Cardiff..........when Wales v Italy on, there will be about 70,000 empty seats on show.
No double header semi-final.....see above Australia v Fiji willbe played out in front of 80,000 emptyseats....

These 2 events offer 165,000 tickets (33% of the tournament total) and will be LIVE on TV.......that's too many PR eggs in one basket IMHO......the casual observer is what we want to attract to become future fans.....emptyseats don'tcreate astampede.....sold out stadiums do!

Wales v Italy at the Gnoll.......England v Australia at Loftus Road or Craven Cottage, a semi at the KC, the other at the John Smiths stadium......

I'd also have Australia v Ireland and PNG V NZ played at the stoop......where you'd get closer to 30k combined there than you will as it stands. And France v PNG in france.......caravan park doesn't sellout for HKA games for christs sake..


as I say, they may sell out as they are.....but I sincerely doubt it.

oh...one more thing.
I am sat in bed watching the WCC on an illegal video feed from the UK........Adverts for soccer, health lottery, fosters, my protien, ladbrooks ap, uncle bens rice..........nothing about the RLWC 2013.

I'd have run a teaser ad for the RLWC........nothing major, just a teaser. There will be a fair few crims watching this game in bars in London......maybe an ad for organised trips to stab city for the Ireland v Aussie game? Maybe a 72 quid Aussie/NZ game pack?

Cracking idea. Maybe they'll do it closer to the time.

Maybe they will....., but todays game represents a better chance of Australian/Kiwi eyeballs actually watching the RL.......it's a Jingoistic ANZAC thing.

Obviously the thread was intended to be a positive one, I don't think that's a difficult concept to grasp. This was a thread about encouraging World Cup ticket pre-sales, I think it's pretty obvious that the intention was not for individuals with agendas to talk about how the competition is doomed from the start. Your first contribution was to agree with a troll who claimed that stadia will be 'embarrassingly half-empty'. You haven't expressed an opinion, you and others have hijacked the thread by posting unsubstantiated garbage.
I'm pretty sure everyone is aware that the tournament will not be a complete sell out, I'm not sure why you or anyone would feel the need to state such an obvious fact especially if you have no real point to make in relation to it. Other than the fact that you seemingly take pleasure in the failings of a sport that you claim to enjoy.
So you think that a tournament will be 'plagued by empty seats' to the extent that they will have to draft in faux-supporters for free to make up the numbers, yet this is nobody's fault? Not the fault of the RL community who did not support the tournament, not the fault of the organisers who did not promote the tournament well enough etc, simply that the World Cup is doomed to be played in front of 'embarrassingly half-empty stadia' and there isn't anything anyone can do about it, or anything that could have been done to avoid it? Do you realise how backwards that is?

How could anyone run a television advert when TV broadcasting rights are yet to be confirmed?

re-read what I said.....and then see if you feel so clever?

adverts to sell TICKETS you ing idiot.........TICKETS.......the subject of this thread.......TICK-FxxKING-ETS!!!!!
Makes little difference who is broadcating the comp......unless you're talking about Enfland "fans".

Nope, I still don't understand why accepting there could be an issue with something or other and wondering what could be done, has to start with finding "who's to blame?". It seems like an awfully confrontational approach to problem solving.

Can I just confirm, in respect of your first point, that if a thread is "intended to be" a negative one, you promise not to 'troll' it with positive comments? If someone started a thread entitled " worrying ticket sales" for example? No contradictory opinions allowed in the thread? You can't have it both ways.