Much of the arguments/debate on this thread (actually, on this board) are futile. Everyone seems to be in agreement that league is the better product but falls way behind on exposure, international set up and attendances, well I'd rather have the former (substance over style). League will never get the same exposure as RU much in the same way that football will always dwarf union and badminton will never even get a look in! Leagues aim should be and will be to maximise its potential and.appeal though not to compare with union where the above is concerned, culture and history will always keep league behind union In this regard no matter how good a job the NGB do.

At last





Oh Bugger...and you were doing so well.




Not that I disagree, but "accepting our lot/knowing our place" isn't for me. I'd rather up the effort in trying to attract the public's attention by being far more clever and organised than we have in the past.
I know I bang on about it, but we really do undersell ourselves at times......rather than bitch on about the vichy government 70+ years ago, look ahead and try to build the game. Personally, rather than Wembley or the Olympic stadium for the Kiwis opening game next year, I'd have it at Arsenal and offer their members a really good deal....showcase the game to a new audience.


Nah...you've lost me? [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGBNGB[/url?

I would rather have a product on the field that entertained me than union with pomp and ceremony but a turgid product on the whole.

I work in sport development, well recognised acronym National Governing Body (ie RFL, RFU, FA, LTA...).

I'm not saying 'we' shouldn't grow and maximise the game, be innovative and smarter but some external factors will always exist and comparing attendances with union is futile given the catchment of both sports and the cultural (media) influence. Instead compare growth year on year, and going by that principle the international game is improving.

I agree that we have the better product, but that's not to say we can't strive to attract more fans to the game. It has got to the stage now where the RFL are flogging cheap tickets to next years finals and magic weekend under the guise of "early bird".,"black Friday" and now "xmas bargains". No doubt we'll have a "january sale" and "easter offers" next year too as well as last minute offers......stacking it high and selling it cheap isn't marketing, it's devaluing the product to the extent where your average RL fan is happy to leave it until the last minute, safe in the knowledge that nobody pays full price anymore.

If we devalue the product and if you take into account that 11 of the 12 teams are in one locale, then it gives the media perfect excuse to treat us as badly as they seem to. A ticket for a tenner to see Castleford v Wakefield is hardly NATIONAL news.


I have to say I'd never heard it used before and I've done work for a few NGB's over here. Maybe it's the culture of acronyms that seems to be growing....I remember a contract I had working with Primary Care Trusts in the UK back in 2008/9.....the first thing they sent me was a spreadsheet with about 400 acronyms.....the first meeting I attended I swear nobody spoke English....just acronyms

Tre cool. Oh dear. Firstly, do I disagree with your comment that because you know a few people that go to twickers who don't watch club rugby, that that means they all don't? Yes I do disagree because it's utter rubbish. Secondly, I can see why you avoided the question the first time. The total sum of RL fans of all levels must be at least 200,000 give or take? If RL fans are as 'passionate' as you say, England RL would sell out Old Trafford and Wembley every time because the 200,000 would be fighting over tickets. To say RL international crowds are 'on a par with our active fan base' doesn't add up, nor do your sums.

Gutterfax, no one tries to make out or believe that RU isn't better run. What happens is people criticise the on field product and you get all worked up thinking they're slating all aspects of the sport and retort with a bunch of attendance figures when somebody simply posts that they think scrums are a negative for the on field action.

Stop having an argument with a fictional RL fan and pretending its me fitting your preconceived idea of what you think we all think you very strange individual.

No its not bitter, one of the things I value in a spectator sport is the passion the fans have for the game. Its my view that England ru home games fall very short in this regard.

Genuinely it's not bitterness, but 'swing low sweet chariot' makes my ears bleed.

Now now, don't get all churlish because you can't answer a simple question. I thought you were Mr Cool :}

Ah......passionate fans at games eh! Have to ask, have you attended many NRL games over the years? Also, I've experienced more passion from fans at twickenham than I have at a state of origin match......and let's not even open the debate in London broncos games

What's happened here is that some idiots have subscribed to a channel to watch a game they don't like, some other bright sparks have chipped in with insane claims as to re prowess of Sam burgess and his ability to play anywhere in union and the rest of the brains trust have started to question the reason d'être of a person at an international at twickenham. The stench of insecurity eminating from those who feel the need to even mention union in a vain hope of making league seem bigger or better than it actually is, is quite overpowering.
In short, union generates more interest and associated revenue and is not as simple a game to master as league.
Your need to compound the comparison further increases the stink......better not to mention union at all.....as no quantifiable comparison works in leagues favour

By "some" you mean one, the original poster. Same with the claim of Burgess can play anywhere, just one guy.......this has led you on a 'all RL fans are jealous of RU' rant that everybody thinks the same or that loads subscribed to BT solely for that game.......well done Mr Secure.

Perhaps instead of taking what one or two say and trying to make out that all RL fans are saying it you can stop with the OTT generalisation and stop hissy fitting anytime someone critiques the style of play on a RU pitch.

I for one would rather RFL continue making the game accessible to all fans by using ticket deals.

Having a look at the ticket prices for the RUWC are ridiculous and abhorrent in my opinion.

You may think it's good marketing to charge 500 quid a ticket for the final. I think it's stupidity by people who pay and greed by the IRB

OTT generalisation you say?
Try this one on for size. The threads that invariably get the most traffic on supposed rlfans forums are the ones when anyone dares seem to defend union and a number of dribbling idiots start an imaginary troll hunt.
The FIRST poster........they guy who opened pandora box is the one who has gone for the OTT generalisation.
The posters who claimed burgess would be bored/play any position have also gone OTT with their ignorance of what's involved in playing union and now we've had the totally OTT claim that 82,000 at twickenham are all brain dead sheep.
As for me being mr secure? I am secure in that I know how much the RFU make from the sheep, how little many RL fans know about playing union and that I have never heard of any other person who doesn't like a sport going to the trouble of subscribing just so they can watch the sport they don't like......re-read the last bit and tell me that the op doesn't need their bumps felt!
The bbc and media don't need to be involved in an imaginary anti league campaign.......leagues own fans are it's Achilles heel. Who in their right minds would embrace a sport that has fans who spend their lives blaming public schoolboys for their sports inability to get even the basics right.....chippy doesn't do it justice

I agree with a lot of what you said, but I wonder why Castleford v Wakefield is not national news, when Gloucester v Bath is. It's not like those places are any more of a metropolis that Wakefield is. They market better to (probably) more affluent people and watch in a fairly nice stadium. But that shouldn't mean it is national news. It should mean they get good crowds though.....which they do.

Now you are intentionally ignoring the context and wording of the post you refer to or you're actually not clever enough to understand what was said.

I suspect it's the former because that helps you continue in your quest to paint RL fans as ignorant or deluded "moonies"

Transparent!

I was on a stag do in Bath a few weeks ago and we went to watch Bath Vs Toulouse. The game itself was low intensity, error strewn and noticeably lacking game time atmosphere to say the scoreline was so close in the end (19 - 21).

My main observation was how fanatical the people of Bath were in their turning out for the game. The whole city seem to turn out and it creates a carnival atmosphere around the streets of Bath. We were out until about 2am and there were still loads of fans out in the pubs in their Bath shirts. It was comparable to Challenge Cup final day but on a smaller scale.

Whether these people are genuinely interested in the rugby or whether they see it as a social thing is probably the big question here. There were a hell of a lot of well dressed well-to-do looking folk who seemed more interested in the drinking and socialising than what was actually happening on the field. It kind of reminded me of Polo, more a case of a place to be seen than what's actually going on. That said, I was kind of envious when I compared it to our equivalent. The Rugby League attitude seems to be get in and get out as fast as you can without conversing with the locals in any way shape or form! I suppose comparing the city of Bath to the likes of Wakefield and Castleford is like comparing chalk and cheese but the product we have is far superior and I wouldn't swap a high intensity RL derby in a gritty Northern city for a hob nobbing RU borefest in an architecturally stunning Southern city.

I've been to 1 NRL game in Melbourne which was pretty flat, and the last SOO game at Lang Park, in the terrace behind the sticks, and the atmosphere was incredible - borderline frightening. London fans, while small in number, have always been very passionate about the game.

Finally we're in agreement!

I'd think location of stadium has a lot to do with it, in the old days when Craven APrk was on Holderness road the fans would go in all the pubs before and after. Now its surrounded by fields and council estates everyone gets in and out as quick as possible. That and most northern pubs wont let you in wearing a RL/soccer shirt. The well to do gentry must be more civilised or get less drunk on their G&T's maybe?

I know. Ask Hughes and that prick MacKay if there's one who is a little too enthusiastic from the far side of the world!

The perception of bath v Gloucester in the eyes if the public is a romantic vision of upper middle class folk sipping champers from hampers on the tailgate of the range rover.
Pie and a pint in a back street boozer before ko may be what many of us prefer, but it's not aspirational in the eyes of middle England and if thatcher did anything at all, she made us all believe we could do better for ourselves.
And you're right about marketing......Sam burgess is the pin up boy of bath school kids at present.......given he's hardly touched a ball, thats pretty impressive

Maybe because the following week Bath will Play Northampton and Gloucester Sale and as such there is a national interest in the game/result.

Whereas Cas and Wakey are likely to play teams in the M62 Corridor the following week. Hence why we need teams in London, the SW. SE etc