PDA

View Full Version : A lesson in marketing for the RFL ?



Div
28th December 2011, 23:02
I noticed on the sports news on TV that yesterdays RU Premiership game between Harlequins and Saracens played at Twickers attracted a record crowd for a club ' rugby' game of in excess of 80,000.

Its not a game I care for or take particular much interest in but you have to admire how the RFU manage to get so many people to a game for what most RL fans would consider an inferior product? The regular crowds of the 2 clubs are not top my knowledge particularly prolific. No doubt there were good ticket deals and it was played on a Bank Holiday and in their heartland but say what you want there is no getting away from the fact it was a more than impressive crowd.

To give some context we can take a full set of Super League fixtures involving every club to a single city and over two days cannot pull anything like this sort of attendance even on a cumulative basis. We come as close as we have in many a year to winning a test series against Australia and we have to play it safe and stage the game at Elland Road.

Clearly the RFL have lessons to learn but what do people think they are ? Are they missing a trick ?

geordie_saint
29th December 2011, 00:10
The RFL's marketing is actually quite good. They don't have massive resources available to them due to being less money in the game. The big difference between the crowd at Twickenham is that it was an event. RU fans find reasons to attend big events e.g. internationals, cup finals, one-off spectaculars etc whilst RL fans find excuses not to go to events...

E Saint
29th December 2011, 00:21
The RFL's marketing is actually quite good. They don't have massive resources available to them due to being less money in the game. The big difference between the crowd at Twickenham is that it was an event. RU fans find reasons to attend big events e.g. internationals, cup finals, one-off spectaculars etc whilst RL fans find excuses not to go to events...

But therein lies the problem. Its up to the RFL to give the 'floating' fan a reason to go to the event, and even make it into an 'event' not just a match. Time upon time again, they fail.

I get tickets for most of the events, CC finals, internationals etc. The RFL send me at least a dozen e mails and postal mailings for every event, yet I go to London a couple of weeks before the wembley international and do I see one advert for the match down there?

Bobbyrlfc
29th December 2011, 00:59
The thing is, after pulling in 48,000 for just one game nearly 200 miles away from St. Helens, and further for others, the thing isn't the RFL needs to improve just be persistant and accurate. You have to look at certain aspects such as revenue, but say for example moving a Leeds Vs. Bradford game to Elland Road, i personally think it'd be a huge success, and reach 38,000 no problems whatsoever, if they had the right marketing, right prices and right approach.
Staging a St. Helens-Wigan game somewhere like Goodison or Anfield would be a disaster, Liverpool is so narrow minded that 75% of people have never heard of Rugby League, due to only watching sky sports news (my view anyway), you couldn't host it in Manchester as both venues are used.
You just have to look at it sensibly and it could be achieved, in relative catchment area, moving a one off Warrington-Widnes game to Bolton, could achieve 28,000 too, but realistically, it'd be untenable until the Magic Weekend is scrapped, but first things first, get advertising RFL... the season is near I haven't seen one flyer in Manchester or Liverpool et al.

RedVee Admin
29th December 2011, 01:21
Its not a game I care for or take particular much interest in but you have to admire how the RFU manage to get so many people to a game

Technically speaking, the RFU played no part - it was a Harlequins home league match which they moved over the road. Wasps do the same by moving at least one home match per season from Adams Park to Twickenham and Saracens likewise but they use Wembley. Not forgetting the traditional season opener at Twickenham, which is the four London clubs in a double header. Those two games, especially if Wasps and Quins are the "home" clubs, generate attendances far in excess of the capacities of their regular home grounds. Even Sale did it last season by playing London Irish at the Reebok, getting at least twice the number they would have done at Edgeley Park. And it's commonplace in the NRL too, with many clubs shifting games in to the SFS, etc.

The thing about Super League is the fans are of a different breed and don't take to the road as readily - Saints playing a season less than ten miles from home is testament to that. And that's the key problem.

KelCloset
29th December 2011, 07:11
I heard quite a long piece about this yesterday on talk sport, who were the official media partners for the event. Lots of good ideas from it, for instance a family ticket was only £30, it was sOld as a whole event with dancing dollies, fireworks and some bloke from x factor. Am guessing that even with 80000 there, the cheap ticket prices barely covered costs, but the long term vision of getting new people through the gate is fantastic. The only down side, which was quickly passed over, was that the game was dire. For some reason, this never appears to deter union fans, they accept that their game is boring but still turn out. Was alsoentioned how the game up north is really struggling and the sale games in Manchester and Bolton were generally a flop.

KentishBarry
29th December 2011, 08:43
Clearly the RFL have lessons to learn but what do people think they are ? Are they missing a trick ?

Sadly, it's our fans who need to learn the lessons. Some of them still think it's a long way to the shops!

Div
29th December 2011, 08:48
Technically speaking, the RFU played no part - it was a Harlequins home league match which they moved over the road. Wasps do the same by moving at least one home match per season from Adams Park to Twickenham and Saracens likewise but they use Wembley. Not forgetting the traditional season opener at Twickenham, which is the four London clubs in a double header. Those two games, especially if Wasps and Quins are the "home" clubs, generate attendances far in excess of the capacities of their regular home grounds. Even Sale did it last season by playing London Irish at the Reebok, getting at least twice the number they would have done at Edgeley Park. And it's commonplace in the NRL too, with many clubs shifting games in to the SFS, etc.

The thing about Super League is the fans are of a different breed and don't take to the road as readily - Saints playing a season less than ten miles from home is testament to that. And that's the key problem.


Somebody somewhere is doing something right though, to pull in over 80,000 for a club that averages , what 8000 normally is no mean feat ?

KentishBarry
29th December 2011, 08:52
Somebody somewhere is doing something right though, to pull in over 80,000 for a club that averages , what 8000 normally is no mean feat ?

Yep! Their fans are doing it.

oldshep1960
29th December 2011, 09:49
Rugby League thru an thru, Who cares wot union do? bring on the season, cant wait, been bored shi*less without it!

Reacher
29th December 2011, 09:59
Rugby League thru an thru, Who cares wot union do? bring on the season, cant wait, been bored shi*less without it!

That quote just about sums up the average league fan and is one of the reasons why we will always remain a minority sport.

Let's wear our flat cap and go to the game with our whippets as well, just to make it more traditional.

E Saint
29th December 2011, 10:07
Sadly, it's our fans who need to learn the lessons. Some of them still think it's a long way to the shops!

But its up to the RFL's marketing department to 'educate' / persuade fans to buy into events. The 'we will build it and they will come approach' clearly doesnt work.

Div
29th December 2011, 10:23
Rugby League thru an thru, Who cares wot union do? bring on the season, cant wait, been bored shi*less without it!

Same here but it doesnt mean we cannot learn from other sports and to say otherwise is being blinkered.

KentishBarry
29th December 2011, 10:48
But its up to the RFL's marketing department to 'educate' / persuade fans to buy into events. The 'we will build it and they will come approach' clearly doesnt work.

THB, I'm not sure what else they can do. Ticket prices for events like the Magic Weekend and the 4N double header were stupidly cheap. They sent out loads of info to anyone registered, and they did advertise locally, although they are obviously limited by funds.
IMO I'm affraid, yet again, that the sport was let down by its fans.

rosesaint
29th December 2011, 11:25
I Actually believe that the RFL have a prime area to promote rugby league in Liverpool... I think Manchester with the success the 2 clubs in football terms doing very well and competeing any budget to promote there for the time being would be wasted.

Liverpool has 2 main clubs 1 doing wellish 1 doing awfull

the RFL should concentrate on 2 areas schools and pubs... possibly offering 20-30 schools free equipment (subsidised from sponsors) and free coaching for teachers.... whilst offering pubs merchandise and freebies to those pubs willing to promote the support i,e show it on tv on a friday night!!!! this could also be linked with clubs probably wigan is to far out but widnes and st helens would be ideal fit... sending players/coaches into schools.... whilst also offering backing from the clubs/RFL to start junior teams within these areas possibly linking and supporting councils e.g Knowsley, Liverpool and Sefton. It is not a short term solution but in the longterm I believe would be of a benefit....

Rogues Gallery
29th December 2011, 11:37
Same here but it doesnt mean we cannot learn from other sports and to say otherwise is being blinkered.

We should learn from ALL sports, whether it be marketing, finance, fitness training, diet etc. Sadly the average RL fan can't look further than about 5 miles and then it's inward.
The Wigan and Saracens link up should have helped, but again the majority of Wigan fans have the above average fans opinion. Just a question. The two teams who finished top & second in the league table last year have fitness conditioners who came from which sport?

Buddy
29th December 2011, 12:26
At 10 quid to get in the had it priced correctly, the game was poor and goes to show it's not about the sport itself and more about the event

Div
29th December 2011, 12:36
At 10 quid to get in the had it priced correctly, the game was poor and goes to show it's not about the sport itself and more about the event


The Magic Weekend price is amazing value especially for season ticket holders but the stadium is dreadfully empty for the weekend.

ploughman
29th December 2011, 12:41
We should learn from ALL sports, whether it be marketing, finance, fitness training, diet etc. Sadly the average RL fan can't look further than about 5 miles and then it's inward.
The Wigan and Saracens link up should have helped, but again the majority of Wigan fans have the above average fans opinion. Just a question. The two teams who finished top & second in the league table last year have fitness conditioners who came from which sport?

But its about getting to the Grand Final and those two teams didn't.

Gray77
29th December 2011, 12:51
There are many things to discuss here, but I agree with the origional point that to get 80,000 for a league game is an amazing achievement for Quins, the game of RU and the Aviva Premiership. There is nothing else to say other than to praise them for getting that many people through the turnstiles. Most of the people there were general RU fans, lots probably don't have a club and just follow the England games but were persuaded that a trip to Twickenham would be a good idea. This is the major difference between the two codes.

Union have millions of 'fans' who basically just watch the international game, but this untapped potential is always there if the marketing, date and occasion is right. We are a sport of club fans, we all put our club first and not many of us are prepared to support 'the game' if our club isn't involved.

They also have a supportive media who are happy to promote the game and promote these occasions, and in a city like London with a free Evening Standard that millions read every day it's relatively easy to promote these games and get massive attention. We have no such media outlet to promote our game to millions of captive readers or viewers for days leading up to an event.

Also, and I know I harp on about this, their league comp is alot more important in a week to week sense. They only have a top 4 play-off so most teams treat the regular season games as vital in order to stay in the hunt. We have a system whereby our regular season games mean less than they should, and using the Magic weekend as an example none of us can realistically say that the games on that weekend are important for more than local bragging rights and a good day out.

As a sport we are never likely to get 80,000 to turn out for a league game at OT, Wembley, Twickenham etc because we don't have the same number of floating fans. People either follow the game or they don't, we don't have millions who just watch the Four Nations and then ignore the club game like Union does with the millions who watch the Six Nations and World Cup but couldn't tell you who was top of the league. So, we are left to admire the crowds they get for these one-off games and ruefully admit we cannot replicate it, and I think we would be naive to try to.

We just need to make our regular season more important, give the weekly rounds more intensity, reduce the number of teams that make the play-offs and then market the hell out of the play-off games. If we priced the play-off games correctly, gave fans an option to pay a little more for season tickets with play-off tickets included etc then we could turn a proper top 5 or top 6 play-off series into a big end of season event. 25,000 people at Wigan, 18,000 at Saints and Leeds, 15,000 at Wire etc would showcase the game at a time when people may pay more attention to the game. When we have half empty stadiums at play-off time we look like a joke of a sport, and when we tell non-fans about our play-off system we look like a joke of a sport. Make the games more important, make the play-offs a real elite event and fill our club grounds and then we can start saying we are getting somewhere near our potential as a sport.

RedVee Admin
29th December 2011, 12:51
We should learn from ALL sports, whether it be marketing, finance, fitness training, diet etc. Sadly the average RL fan can't look further than about 5 miles and then it's inward.
The Wigan and Saracens link up should have helped, but again the majority of Wigan fans have the above average fans opinion. Just a question. The two teams who finished top & second in the league table last year have fitness conditioners who came from which sport?
Assuming you mean the top two Union teams, no coincidence then that Sale have gone from bottom four last season to top four this season, now they have Steve Diamond in charge and Nigel Ashley Jones conditioning?

Wizards Sleeve
29th December 2011, 13:12
The thing about Super League is the fans are of a different breed and don't take to the road as readily - Saints playing a season less than ten miles from home is testament to that. And that's the key problem.

I have to agree with this, and the thing is, it's caused by so many clubs coming from the same area. We moan about expanding the game and keeping it where it is in the heartland, but we will always have this mentality as long as it stays the same.

You have hit the nail on the head, the logic of many Sintelliner, (myself included) was that a 30 mile trip, rugby or otherwise, used to be deemed a fair old trek. My mentality has changed somewhat now I'm living in Hull. 30 miles doesn't seem half as far as did when I was back home.

When you consider that the Hull clubs nearest away match is 50 miles away at Castleford, that's my point. They regard that game as 'fairly close' whilst many at home would deem 50 miles as 'quite a fair distance'. That's why I'd consider them to have a decent away following and a good following at major events like Cardiff and Cup Finals.

It's all relative. I get in the car and go nearly 4 miles to my favourite chippy without a second thought. I'd never have travelled that far back home for a bag of chips. It's half way to bloody Wigan for gods sake.

If people won't travel to these events, then the RFL need to entice them. I don't know the answer. Some fans wouldn't go if you gave them a free ticket I guess.

Saint Ged
29th December 2011, 14:30
I msaw on one of the news braodcasts this morning something to the effect that the Rugby Union are planning to stage some more of there games inthe north and Old Trafford was mentioned there was even something said about challenging Rugby League.

Reacher
29th December 2011, 14:34
I think one of the Six Nations Fixtures is destined to be at OT

The Wee Waa Womble
29th December 2011, 15:28
Rugby League thru an thru, Who cares wot union do? bring on the season, cant wait, been bored shi*less without it!

Problem is if league doesn't grow as a sport in England it'll die out eventually. It won't just be able to carry on while union gets stronger and stronger because in the end it all comes down to money, union will eventually eat away at the league heartlands and the youngsters coming through to form the backbone of our game will end up at union clubs. The AVIVA Premiership is due a hefty salary cap increase in the next few years to keep touch with the french league, when that comes through they'll have bigger and better squads and it'll be even easier for them than it is now to go and poach not only our top players, but our young prospects as well. There is a hell of a lot we can learn from union in every aspect of our sport.

Rogues Gallery
29th December 2011, 15:42
Assuming you mean the top two Union teams, no coincidence then that Sale have gone from bottom four last season to top four this season, now they have Steve Diamond in charge and Nigel Ashley Jones conditioning?

I was actually talking about Warrington and Wigan whose conditioners, Chris Baron and Mark Bitcon who both came from Rugby Union.

RedVee Admin
29th December 2011, 17:35
Ah, thought you were referring to Saracens and Farrell. Dunno who finished second.

eddiewaringsflatcap
29th December 2011, 17:40
Is anyone surprised Union can do this and we cant?

I have heard blame put at t he fans door but the truth is far from that. A bonafide Saints vs Wigan super league game is capable of 30,000+ (in Wigan) if both teams are on top of their game. However and this is the big but, this is entirely due to the authenticity of the rivalry and the administrations of Saints and Wigan. As soon as the RFL or anyone else try to tinker or hype up an event, say by taking a game on the road, then your every day RL fan will switch off.

The RFL have a terrible record of both creating non events and creating gimmicks that fall flat on their face. Whether it be Gateshead, Paris St. Germain or Millenium Magic the RFL fail every time. They are a complete basket case and both RL fans and the so called 'floating public' don't want to be associated with the latest laughable offerings that Wood and Lewis invariably serve up.

Martyn Sadler and the gospel of expansion that is Rugby League Weekly may try to argue our problems can be solved by a dose of marketing and a diet of 'expanshun' but you've gotta have credibility before any of that. Until the RFL start to become more realistic in their aims and more importantly, can execute a business plan that is sensible then the game will always be stifled. Strong leadership is paramount. I am not sure the RFU have this at the moment but they have strong foundations due to predecessors who took advantage of a favourable establishment (eg. media, schools etc) and had intelligence.

Until things change at the top of the RFL we will always struggle to create that big game feeling that RU manage to pull off.

The Wee Waa Womble
29th December 2011, 17:57
The RFL have a terrible record of both creating non events and creating gimmicks that fall flat on their face. Whether it be Gateshead, Paris St. Germain or Millenium Magic the RFL fail every time. They are a complete basket case and both RL fans and the so called 'floating public' don't want to be associated with the latest laughable offerings that Wood and Lewis invariably serve up.

Wouldn't say Magic Weekend is a failure in the slightest. It's not reached it's full potential yet but it's by no means a failure.

eddiewaringsflatcap
29th December 2011, 18:04
Wouldn't say Magic Weekend is a failure in the slightest. It's not reached it's full potential yet but it's by no means a failure.

I'd say the decision to retreat to Manchester is a sign of failure. The events were a squib really and did not mange to create the feeling of a big event. More a feeling of the RFL trying hard in the manner of Kevin who you always picked last for five a side and shoved in goal.

Rogues Gallery
29th December 2011, 19:54
I'd say the decision to retreat to Manchester is a sign of failure. The events were a squib really and did not mange to create the feeling of a big event. More a feeling of the RFL trying hard in the manner of Kevin who you always picked last for five a side and shoved in goal.

Whilst agreeing with you I do think the RFL need someone with vision and application. It may not go down well on here but someone with the same drive and energy that Maurice Lindsay had.

The Magic Weekend, a great concept. Why can't we tell everyone where it's going to be for the next four years.
For example

Year 1 Manchester
Year 2 Newcastle
Year 3 Dublin
Year 4 Cardiff

Those are examples not necessarily suggestions.

Why do we not know the exact dates and venues for the 2013 World Cup?

Why do we not have a four year cycle for the Aussie tours?

saint pie
29th December 2011, 21:16
One of the problems is that once people get onto sports committees they stay there. No matter whether or not they are any good no bugger can get rid of them, and at Red Hall we have more than our fair share of useless tossers. I would also suggest that your average Union supporter will have more disposable income than the average League fan, and that includes me. What really upsets me is that we have by far the better game and yet we can't seem to sell it properly - circular argument - back to the tossers at Red Hall. I watched the 82,000 game from dear old Twickers and I thought it was pretty poor fare served up by the top two teams in Union, and yet the fans lapped it up.

Div
29th December 2011, 22:18
.. A bonafide Saints vs Wigan super league game is capable of 30,000+ (in Wigan) if both teams are on top of their game. ..

Or maybe not anymore given the fact that the derby games are way too frequent these days and whilst victory is always sweet they are hardly critical as we now know you can finish 5th and win the competition. I think with fewer and more meaningful games the hunger for them would be greater.

However, I'm currently struggling to envisage how a Saints-Wigan league game played on Good Friday at Old Trafford could pull a full house which is a fair comparison with the Quins fixture I would hazzard a guess..?

Albion
30th December 2011, 01:37
....whilst victory is always sweet they are hardly critical as we now know you can finish 5th and win the competition. I think with fewer and more meaningful games the hunger for them would be greater....

Sick of people referring to this point...yes it's an issue but to put it at the foot of every criticism of the sport is a tad too far

warringtonsaint
30th December 2011, 07:13
Wouldn't say Magic Weekend is a failure in the slightest. It's not reached it's full potential yet but it's by no means a failure.

It's hardly been a roaring success either though.

We went to the first few, but not since Murrayfield - the year the RFL launched a team in S Wales and incomprehensively moved the event from Wales to Scotland - it's lost its appeal for us I'm afraid - not considering going to Manchester for this year's offering either.

KentishBarry
30th December 2011, 08:24
- it's lost its appeal for us I'm afraid - not considering going to Manchester for this year's offering either.

I just dont get that.

KentishBarry
30th December 2011, 08:29
... the average League fan, and that includes me...
...I watched the 82,000 game from dear old Twickers and I thought it was pretty poor fare served up by the top two teams in Union, and yet the fans lapped it up.

Just out of interest SP, why did you go/watch it?

Spider Ski
30th December 2011, 08:34
The RFL's main problem is your average rugby league fan.

They are a stubborn, cantankerous, quite often hard up bunch, who will moan about absolutely anything. Anything new, anything not showing initiative. They have tried things, taking two international games to Wembley. People just grumbled and claimed it was too close to Christmas, or why should they go to London.

The sooner we as fans pull our minds off moaning and embrace (within our respective budgets) what the RFL tries, the sooner they have more success

warringtonsaint
30th December 2011, 09:29
I just dont get that.

What is it that you don't get??

KentishBarry
30th December 2011, 09:46
What is it that you don't get??

You not wanting to watch a rugby match involving the team you follow, plus 2/3 other matches thrown in at no extra cost.

Gray77
30th December 2011, 10:05
The RFL's main problem is your average rugby league fan.

They are a stubborn, cantankerous, quite often hard up bunch, who will moan about absolutely anything. Anything new, anything not showing initiative. They have tried things, taking two international games to Wembley. People just grumbled and claimed it was too close to Christmas, or why should they go to London.

The sooner we as fans pull our minds off moaning and embrace (within our respective budgets) what the RFL tries, the sooner they have more success

You mean just blindly follow the powers-that-be and accept everything the RFL does as 'progressive'. In twenty years we have gone from having a regular season where the best team won the title, Ashes tours, a GB team that actually competed, 80,000 crowds at Wembley for Test Matches, top class Union players coming to play League, a Challenge Cup that excited us and a Final that was one of the jewels in the sporting year, and now we have what?

27 diluted games followed by play-offs in front of half empty grounds where you can lose half your games and then be crowned champions for having a good 3 weeks, an international side that is still way behind the Australians, the Four Nations which is basically a 2 game series with the Eng-NZ game and then the winners of that vs the Australians, crowds of 40,000 at Wembley for Test Matches, top class League players going to play Union, a Challenge Cup that has been diluted and devalued by the RFL and Sky with a Final that now fails to even sell-out, and a Super League that contains failing clubs for no reason other than their location whilst aspiring clubs in League heartlands are left to rot in the lower leagues.

Yeah mate, why complain at the decisions and tactics of the wonderful RFL! :shock:

KentishBarry
30th December 2011, 10:13
... a GB team that actually competed, 80,000 crowds at Wembley for Test Matches,

20 years ago?
Check your facts mate.

Gray77
30th December 2011, 10:17
20 years ago?
Check your facts mate.

1992 Rugby League World Cup Final, Wembley, Australia 10-6 Great Britain, Attendance - 73631

Sorry, 6.5k out and it was only 19 years ago! :rolleyes:

KentishBarry
30th December 2011, 10:26
1992 Rugby League World Cup Final, Wembley, Australia 10-6 Great Britain, Attendance - 73631

Sorry, 6.5k out and it was only 19 years ago! :rolleyes:

Sorry, it was the 'test match' thing that threw me.

Gray77
30th December 2011, 10:38
Sorry, it was the 'test match' thing that threw me.

I was really just trying to magnify how a GB-Australia match back then meant so much more, had a bigger crowd, were live on the BBC and got good viewing figures etc. I hate moaning about the game, I love it when it's at it's best, but there are so many things that I think can be done better that I just can't ignore them because our game isn't strong enough to just brush aside bad decisions that are made on our behalf by the RFL. Bad decisions are slowly killing the game as a sport that will be taken seriously at a national level, and I think those bad decisions can be so easily altered.

eddiewaringsflatcap
30th December 2011, 10:43
You mean just blindly follow the powers-that-be and accept everything the RFL does as 'progressive'. In twenty years we have gone from having a regular season where the best team won the title, Ashes tours, a GB team that actually competed, 80,000 crowds at Wembley for Test Matches, top class Union players coming to play League, a Challenge Cup that excited us and a Final that was one of the jewels in the sporting year, and now we have what?

27 diluted games followed by play-offs in front of half empty grounds where you can lose half your games and then be crowned champions for having a good 3 weeks, an international side that is still way behind the Australians, the Four Nations which is basically a 2 game series with the Eng-NZ game and then the winners of that vs the Australians, crowds of 40,000 at Wembley for Test Matches, top class League players going to play Union, a Challenge Cup that has been diluted and devalued by the RFL and Sky with a Final that now fails to even sell-out, and a Super League that contains failing clubs for no reason other than their location whilst aspiring clubs in League heartlands are left to rot in the lower leagues.

Yeah mate, why complain at the decisions and tactics of the wonderful RFL! :shock:

Bravo! Hear, hear!!

warringtonsaint
30th December 2011, 10:46
You not wanting to watch a rugby match involving the team you follow, plus 2/3 other matches thrown in at no extra cost.

Personal choice pal, nothing more.

As I said, we went to the first few, after which the event lost its appeal.

Gray sums it up for me with his comments.

Conversely, we've been to the CC Final every year for the past 20 odd years, because that still is a spectacle (irrespective of the way Sky have tried to denegrate it)

KentishBarry
30th December 2011, 10:52
I was really just trying to magnify how a GB-Australia match back then meant so much more, had a bigger crowd, were live on the BBC and got good viewing figures etc. I hate moaning about the game, I love it when it's at it's best, but there are so many things that I think can be done better that I just can't ignore them because our game isn't strong enough to just brush aside bad decisions that are made on our behalf by the RFL. Bad decisions are slowly killing the game as a sport that will be taken seriously at a national level, and I think those bad decisions can be so easily altered.

OK. I see where you're coming from now. My brain got a little fogged by the memories of us 'competing' againts the Aussie touring sides of that era!

The issue I have, and I've said it on here before, is that people often forget the bad things in our sports history prior to SL...But that's another debate for another day.

Div
30th December 2011, 10:58
Sick of people referring to this point...yes it's an issue but to put it at the foot of every criticism of the sport is a tad too far


Tough, its entirely relevent here.

I remember Central Park being rammed when Saints visited for a league game yet compare that with the ' vital' play off games last season. No matter how you cut it the increased number of games between the two , as many as 5 or 6 a season has taken much of the edge away.

Div
30th December 2011, 10:59
You mean just blindly follow the powers-that-be and accept everything the RFL does as 'progressive'. In twenty years we have gone from having a regular season where the best team won the title, Ashes tours, a GB team that actually competed, 80,000 crowds at Wembley for Test Matches, top class Union players coming to play League, a Challenge Cup that excited us and a Final that was one of the jewels in the sporting year, and now we have what?

27 diluted games followed by play-offs in front of half empty grounds where you can lose half your games and then be crowned champions for having a good 3 weeks, an international side that is still way behind the Australians, the Four Nations which is basically a 2 game series with the Eng-NZ game and then the winners of that vs the Australians, crowds of 40,000 at Wembley for Test Matches, top class League players going to play Union, a Challenge Cup that has been diluted and devalued by the RFL and Sky with a Final that now fails to even sell-out, and a Super League that contains failing clubs for no reason other than their location whilst aspiring clubs in League heartlands are left to rot in the lower leagues.

Yeah mate, why complain at the decisions and tactics of the wonderful RFL! :shock:


Bang on the money as usual Gray.

Div
30th December 2011, 11:08
The RFL's main problem is your average rugby league fan..

The sooner we as fans pull our minds off moaning and embrace (within our respective budgets) what the RFL tries, the sooner they have more success


There is clearly something different in the mindset of the Union fan although I cannot quite put my finger on it. I'm not close enough to Harlequins and Saracens but what would thir average combined home gate be ? I would hazzard a guess c 20,000? Its clear therefore that even allowing for occasional fans of the two clubs involved in that fixture that many , many neutrals attended.

I just dont think that a Saints v Wigan game in the North West would attract droves of say Widnes, Warrington or Salford fans to attend. Likewise would thousands of us Saints fans turn up at say the City of Manchester to watch a stand alone Widnes v Warrington fixture ? I probably wouldnt and suspect you wouldnt either. ( although I have watched virtually every Magic weekend game at every event and must be in a minority there !!)

Either the RFU have an absolute out of this world marketing strategy and we are missing a huge trick OR there is a fundamental difference in the type of fan that attends the respective games.

It was as far as I am aware a regular league game between not two hugely supported clubs that for some reason attracted probably 6 or more times the gate had it been played at one of their home grounds.

Div
30th December 2011, 11:13
I just dont get that.


I know quite a few week in week out home and away supporters that have refused to go to a single Magic Weekend because they do not agree with it.

KentishBarry
30th December 2011, 11:28
I know quite a few week in week out home and away supporters that have refused to go to a single Magic Weekend because they do not agree with it.

That's the bit I don't get, Div.

Gray77
30th December 2011, 11:29
There is clearly something different in the mindset of the Union fan although I cannot quite put my finger on it. I'm not close enough to Harlequins and Saracens but what would thir average combined home gate be ? I would hazzard a guess c 20,000? Its clear therefore that even allowing for occasional fans of the two clubs involved in that fixture that many , many neutrals attended.

I just dont think that a Saints v Wigan game in the North West would attract droves of say Widnes, Warrington or Salford fans to attend. Likewise would thousands of us Saints fans turn up at say the City of Manchester to watch a stand alone Widnes v Warrington fixture ? I probably wouldnt and suspect you wouldnt either. ( although I have watched virtually every Magic weekend game at every event and must be in a minority there !!)

Either the RFU have an absolute out of this world marketing strategy and we are missing a huge trick OR there is a fundamental difference in the type of fan that attends the respective games.

It was as far as I am aware a regular league game between not two hugely supported clubs that for some reason attracted probably 6 or more times the gate had it been played at one of their home grounds.

I only think this works for the RFU in London mate, with mass marketing in the Evening Standard, on the tube etc. With 8 million people looking for something to do and with tickets at very good value it's do-able to get 80,000 out for a regular season game, but not sure they could do it in any other city in England.

Div
30th December 2011, 11:31
That's the bit I don't get, Div.


They just dont agree with the principle and therefore refuse to support it. Simple as that really. Why an extra game ? Why have to travel to Cardiff / Edinburgh or wherever at huge outlay to see us play a team from down the road ?

Lets face it Saints themselves virtually said they didn't want to play in it or agree with it one year in Edinburgh and the way they played confirmed it. On that basis you could question why the supporters should be behind the concept.

KentishBarry
30th December 2011, 11:41
They just dont agree with the principle and therefore refuse to support it. Simple as that really. Why an extra game ? Why have to travel to Cardiff / Edinburgh or wherever at huge outlay to see us play a team from down the road ?
...

Then, to get back to your OP on lessons to be learned, I've no idea what the RFL are supposed to do to get something similar in SL.
I'm still of the opinion that it's the fans (well, some of them!) letting the sport down.

Gray77
30th December 2011, 11:42
They just dont agree with the principle and therefore refuse to support it. Simple as that really. Why an extra game ? Why have to travel to Cardiff / Edinburgh or wherever at huge outlay to see us play a team from down the road ?

Lets face it Saints themselves virtually said they didn't want to play in it or agree with it one year in Edinburgh and the way they played confirmed it. On that basis you could question why the supporters should be behind the concept.

Indeed, and to be fair to Saints they are the one club who have consistently questioned such things as MM, the move to 8 team play-offs, club call etc. If the likes of Wigan, Wire, Leeds and Hull had the same attitude as Saints we may find ourselves in a better situation as a sport. I can't for the life of me understand for example why the likes of Wigan voted to keep the current play-off format when it did them no favours at all last season, and Wire lost one play-off game and it ruined a wonderful season yet they abstained in the vote. It doesn't make sense.

Div
30th December 2011, 11:46
Yes if fans stick to their principles and the club has the balls to say what it thinks its hard to ctiticise.

I dont particularly agree with the Magic Weekend but have attended them all and enjoyed them to be fair.

RedVee Admin
30th December 2011, 12:03
Wire lost one play-off game and it ruined a wonderful season yet they abstained in the vote. It doesn't make sense.
It does: they don't want to say yes because it screwed them; they don't want to say no and be labelled sore losers; so they abstain, make their point and don't look like sore losers.

RedVee Admin
30th December 2011, 12:09
I'm not close enough to Harlequins and Saracens but what would thir average combined home gate be ? I would hazzard a guess c 20,000? Its clear therefore that even allowing for occasional fans of the two clubs involved in that fixture that many , many neutrals attended.

It was as far as I am aware a regular league game between not two hugely supported clubs that for some reason attracted probably 6 or more times the gate had it been played at one of their home grounds.

Harlequins - The Stoop - 14,816
Saracens - Vicarage Road - 17,477

A game between these two might sell out at their home grounds, if they're lucky. So you're bang on and the additional 60k+ fans were either casual supporters or hooray henrys looking for a boxing day jolly seeing as they couldn't go kill a few foxes.



As I mentioned earlier, Wasps take a game to Twickenham each year, normally around St Georges day. Last year Bath were the visitors and the attendance was 60,208 - that's nearly ten times the 10,516 capacity of Adams Park and had the game been played there, it would not have sold out.

Going back to Saracens, they have plans in place to redevelop the old Barnet Copthall athletics ground, which is right in their traditional catchment area, into a modern facility thus removing the need to play at Watford. What's the forecasted capacity of their new ground? Around 10,000.

So to sum up:

Give a Rugby League fan a league game at his home ground and he'll show up - play it somewhere daft and he won't.

Give a Rugby Union fan a league game at his home ground and he'll not show up - play it somewhere daft and he'll be loading the spaniels and baskets of Bolly into the Range Rover before you can say Toff ****.

Gray77
30th December 2011, 12:12
It does: they don't want to say yes because it screwed them; they don't want to say no and be labelled sore losers; so they abstain, make their point and don't look like sore losers.

If that is the case then that is a short-term response to a long-term problem. If Wire had joined with Saints in voting No I'm sure they could have got together with other clubs and formed a cartel of sorts against the proposals. As with everything, it is difficult to go against the grain if just one person/club is voting against something, but once you get several saying No it can snowball.

Personally I wouldn't have accused Wire of being sore losers in the slightest. The system is unfair, what happened to Wire proved it, and a No vote was the best thing to do for the future of the game and the regular season. Anybody that accused Wire of being sore losers would have simply reduced an important issue to the level of the playground, and personally I'd ignore such jibes and applaud Wire for doing the right thing.

Unfortunately they didn't, they bottled it.

warringtonsaint
30th December 2011, 12:15
I'm still of the opinion that it's the fans (well, some of them!) letting the sport down.

Include me and all the others who don't go to MM in this do you?

ploughman
30th December 2011, 12:19
Perhaps RU fans have more disposable income than RL fans?North South divide and all that

KentishBarry
30th December 2011, 12:28
Include me and all the others who don't go to MM in this do you?

I don't know you personally, but, if I've correctly understood your reasons for not going, then yes. IMO, you are letting the sport down by not supporting this event.

RedVee Admin
30th December 2011, 12:30
In that case, shoot me at dawn too, for letting the sport down.

ploughman
30th December 2011, 12:32
I didnt let the sport down but it cost me a hell of a lot of money not doing so!

KentishBarry
30th December 2011, 12:36
I didnt let the sport down but it cost me a hell of a lot of money not doing so!

Bet you enjoyed it though.

ploughman
30th December 2011, 12:41
Bet you enjoyed it though.

Yes,i've enjoyed every magic weekend i've been to,but it doesn't make it a great concept.It will be interesting to see the attendance at Manchester this year as in the past the cost of travel was the excuse most people used for not going.

KentishBarry
30th December 2011, 12:48
Yes,i've enjoyed every magic weekend i've been to,but it doesn't make it a great concept.It will be interesting to see the attendance at Manchester this year as in the past the cost of travel was the excuse most people used for not going.

I think many people get too hung up on on 'concepts' and what games 'mean'.
I just see it as my side playing another with the object of beating them.
All being well, I'll be in Manchester to see another.

Gray77
30th December 2011, 12:53
Then, to get back to your OP on lessons to be learned, I've no idea what the RFL are supposed to do to get something similar in SL.
I'm still of the opinion that it's the fans (well, some of them!) letting the sport down.

I'm not sure why you come up with that conclusion. Super League crowds are good, the likes of Wigan, Leeds, Wire, Hull and Bradford posted good averages last season and Saints will be back amongst the top 3/4 for crowds from next season. For the product we are given I think RL fans are a credit to the game. How many other sets of fans would put up with the joke that is the regular season and the joke that is a play-off system were more than half the teams qualify for it?

The fact that regular season crowds are so high at the bigger clubs is a credit to the fans of the game, a credit to the culture of our clubs that rivalry games still bring out big gates despite the relative lack of importance they have now to the outcome of the season and the title race. To blame the fans of the game for not supporting the decisions the RFL make is off the mark IMO, and the people who run the game have so far managed to slowly kill RL as a nationally relevant sport but have mainly got away with it by being able to quote the healthy average attendance figures, decent viewer ratings on Sky etc as a vindication of their decisions.

Some may say that those figures indicate that fans are delighted with what they are seeing, I would say it shows that fans are extremely loyal to their clubs and the game, but when it comes to daft initiatives and things like MM, oversized play-offs etc they draw the line. If you only look at the low turnout at MM, Test matches etc then it may look like fans don't support the game, but I would argue that it's amazing that the fans turn out for the bread and butter weekly matches in such high numbers given the way the RFL have messed about with the rules and weekly rounds.

KentishBarry
30th December 2011, 13:08
I'm not sure why you come up with that conclusion. Super League crowds are good, the likes of Wigan, Leeds, Wire, Hull and Bradford posted good averages last season and Saints will be back amongst the top 3/4 for crowds from next season. For the product we are given I think RL fans are a credit to the game. How many other sets of fans would put up with the joke that is the regular season and the joke that is a play-off system were more than half the teams qualify for it?

The fact that regular season crowds are so high at the bigger clubs is a credit to the fans of the game, a credit to the culture of our clubs that rivalry games still bring out big gates despite the relative lack of importance they have now to the outcome of the season and the title race. To blame the fans of the game for not supporting the decisions the RFL make is off the mark IMO, and the people who run the game have so far managed to slowly kill RL as a nationally relevant sport but have mainly got away with it by being able to quote the healthy average attendance figures, decent viewer ratings on Sky etc as a vindication of their decisions.

Some may say that those figures indicate that fans are delighted with what they are seeing, I would say it shows that fans are extremely loyal to their clubs and the game, but when it comes to daft initiatives and things like MM, oversized play-offs etc they draw the line. If you only look at the low turnout at MM, Test matches etc then it may look like fans don't support the game, but I would argue that it's amazing that the fans turn out for the bread and butter weekly matches in such high numbers given the way the RFL have messed about with the rules and weekly rounds.


Is too much to ask fans to support both (Domestic games and the other stuff)?

KentishBarry
30th December 2011, 13:32
People,
End of year drinks are calling so I must leave you now.
Good debate. Sorry if I'm letting it down!
See you in the New Year. Have a good one!
KB X

Div
30th December 2011, 13:36
Perhaps RU fans have more disposable income than RL fans?North South divide and all that

Not sure that is a factor to be honest. Given the price of everything down south is generally more expensive not sure the general populace have more disposable income. However , RU may draw more support from certain social backgrounds and classes that have right enough.

Gray77
30th December 2011, 13:40
Is too much to ask fans to support both (Domestic games and the other stuff)?

But we did. We used to get big crowds for Challenge Cup Semi's, Test Matches etc. It's not the fans who ended Ashes Tours, it's not the fans who spend week after week on Sky degrading the image of the Challenge Cup, it's not the fans who came up with an 8 team play-off format that dilutes the 27 weekly rounds. Why should people support a system that is making the game a laughing stock? Imagine if football or RU adopted the play-off system we have now in Super League. Would fans accept it as readily as we have and still back the sport week after week watching diluted regular season games like we do?

The games don't mean anything like as much as they should yet we still turn out in decent numbers to watch them. The RFL are actually lucky that as a sport we have such loyal fans who put up with so much nonsense.

Div
30th December 2011, 13:43
I think many people get too hung up on on 'concepts' and what games 'mean'.
I just see it as my side playing another with the object of beating them.
.


Fair enough but ask yourself what did the play off victory at the DW last season actually mean / get us ? Answer : Cock all thats why hardly any bugger turned up ! We then played them in the 'real' play off game a week or so later.

RedVee Admin
30th December 2011, 13:48
End of year drinks are calling so I must leave you now.
Is it too much to ask you to support both? ;)

Div
30th December 2011, 13:57
End of Job drinks for me in 1 hour !!

saint pie
30th December 2011, 14:09
Just out of interest SP, why did you go/watch it?

To be honest KB I watched the (so called) highlights on TV. I was curious to see what had attracted 82,000 to go to the game. Truth is I'm no wiser now!!

Gray77
30th December 2011, 14:13
I think many people get too hung up on on 'concepts' and what games 'mean'.
I just see it as my side playing another with the object of beating them.

Wonderful notion, I wish that it were like that every week. The object of a competitive and fair sport is that the winning of games equals success and the failure to win games equals failure. Leeds are Champions, but did they achieve the objectives you set out on a weekly basis last season? If the argument is that they didn't need to (which they obviously didn't) then we are admitting that those 27 weekly games don't mean anything like as much as they should. But we still roll out week after week supporting a product that has been diluted and doesn't decide anything bar which 6 clubs are the biggest failures and miss the play-offs. That Wigan, Leeds and Hull get 14-15,000 every other week, Wire and Bradford 11-12,000 each and Saints probably more than that this season shows that RL fans are still loyal enough to support the game despite it's failings. The RFL should not take this support for granted forever IMO.

I'm off now as well, train to catch to Manchester. Happy New Year to you all, we can continue this next week!!

RedVee Admin
30th December 2011, 14:19
End of Job drinks for me in 1 hour !!

End of job?

Div
30th December 2011, 14:45
End of job?

Aye !

RedVee Admin
30th December 2011, 14:56
Get a job, tax dodger.

warringtonsaint
30th December 2011, 18:25
I don't know you personally, but, if I've correctly understood your reasons for not going, then yes. IMO, you are letting the sport down by not supporting this event.

Well, I'm gutted................clearly having been a season ticket holder for many many years, going to every CC Final for over 20 years and having been to several Magic Weekends, no longer wishing to go means I'm letting the sport down. Oh dear, woe is me.

Get a grip pal and understand that we all have freedom of choice.

KentishBarry
3rd January 2012, 09:20
Well, I'm gutted................clearly having been a season ticket holder for many many years, going to every CC Final for over 20 years and having been to several Magic Weekends, no longer wishing to go means I'm letting the sport down. Oh dear, woe is me.

Get a grip pal and understand that we all have freedom of choice.

Of course we have freedom of choice. I would't wish to deny you that!
All I'm saying is that fans should get behind these 'events'. Many have valid reasons for not going. I'm just being critical of those fans who choose not to go because they don't like the concept. I'm still not sure if you fall into this catagory, and I think it's great that you go to Wembley etc.
It isn't meant to be a personal attack on you. Sorry if it seem that way.

Div started this thread by asking what RFL could do to match the big crowd at Twickenham. IMO, they have already provided a platform for this with the MW's. It's up to the fans to make it happen.

headtackle
3rd January 2012, 10:22
Can't argue with what the RFU did. Over Xmas people are crying out to do something and get out and about and a big game, with cheap tickets and giving fans, relatives and visitors a chance to sample Twickenham was bound to succeed. From memory weren't Saracens previously a London club before moving out so probably tapping in to a lot of old fans

Dont think can blame ticket prices for poor attendances at RFL events as plenty of decent advance deals.

A test of RFL marketing and pricing this year will be whether the Exiles games can grow, be well supported and become a major event

Anyway HNY to all

RedVee Admin
3rd January 2012, 10:31
Saracens ARE a London club - they haven't moved anywhere.

southernsaint7
3rd January 2012, 10:44
Saracens ARE a London club - they haven't moved anywhere.

isnt watford hertfordshire? as is their st albans training base

Geoggy
3rd January 2012, 11:09
It's all past Watford gap

warringtonsaint
3rd January 2012, 11:14
Of course we have freedom of choice. I would't wish to deny you that!
All I'm saying is that fans should get behind these 'events'. Many have valid reasons for not going. I'm just being critical of those fans who choose not to go because they don't like the concept. I'm still not sure if you fall into this catagory, and I think it's great that you go to Wembley etc.
It isn't meant to be a personal attack on you. Sorry if it seem that way.

Div started this thread by asking what RFL could do to match the big crowd at Twickenham. IMO, they have already provided a platform for this with the MW's. It's up to the fans to make it happen.

Apology accepted Barry, thank you.

One of the reasons I'm no longer in favour of MW is perhaps that I think the RL have gone a step too far in increasing the Play-offs to 8, meaning that the regular season games are devalued; MW increases that devaluation as it provides the RL with further "logic" to say that finishing top of the pile doesn't count for very much - that's a whole different argument though and one that's been aired over and over again on other threads, so don't want to derail this one by opening up that particular can of worms.

On the other hand though, I really like the Exiles game idea, and, provided that the RL can find a way to ensure that it doesn't impact adversely on the regular fixtures - as it did last year - it has my full support (and contribution at the gate!)

Sausalito
3rd January 2012, 11:14
I played against them once at Bramley Rd Enfield. a sh** hole of a place.

RedVee Admin
3rd January 2012, 12:03
isnt watford hertfordshire? as is their st albans training base

And? When Saints played at Widnes, did it make them a Cheshire club?

Are London Irish a Berkshire club? Are Wasps a Buckinghamshire club?

As far as they are concerned, Saracens are a North London club and they have plans in place to redevelop Barnet Copthall Stadium in order to "come home".

eddiewaringsflatcap
3rd January 2012, 13:12
Can't believe some people are still blaming the fans. Could you imagine if Stuart Rose or James Dyson turned round and said, 'sorry folks, our business has tried hard but its outr customers fault that people are'nt interested in our products'? There would be uproar and rightly so. The RFL have proved themselves inept at most opportunities and should'nt have such a poor get out as an argument.

KentishBarry
3rd January 2012, 13:25
Can't believe some people are still blaming the fans. Could you imagine if Stuart Rose or James Dyson turned round and said, 'sorry folks, our business has tried hard but its outr customers fault that people are'nt interested in our products'? There would be uproar and rightly so. The RFL have proved themselves inept at most opportunities and should'nt have such a poor get out as an argument.

What would you change Ed?
I guess SKY would a want a set number of games to show. If we lost the MW and reduced the playoffs, what could we replace them with?
Exiles are already part of the programme.

RedVee Admin
3rd January 2012, 13:32
Could you imagine if Stuart Rose or James Dyson turned round and said, 'sorry folks, our business has tried hard but its outr customers fault that people are'nt interested in our products'?
Worked for Woolworths...

eddiewaringsflatcap
3rd January 2012, 13:48
What would you change Ed?
I guess SKY would a want a set number of games to show. If we lost the MW and reduced the playoffs, what could we replace them with?
Exiles are already part of the programme.

I'd begin by endeavoring to restore credibility in how the game is administered. This can be achieved by getting the basics right. Heads should have rolled over the Crusaders episode which was a flagrant example of all that is wrong with the RFL. Once people are held accountable or replaced with people who are competent then things should improve.

The RFL needed the guts to look the play offs in the face and admit they were wrong which the attendances highlight that they were/are. We need to change the play offs to a top 6 format for 14 teams and reward the top team more fairly (stop rewarding mediocrity in the name of false competition and 'intensity'). Getting the league structure right and having a viable play off system is massively important because so much depends on it financially given the international aspect of the game has declined.

There also needs to be a more consistent disciplinary system. At times the sentences and judgements last season were a farce culminating in the Hethringtongate suspension after the Leeds Huddersfield game at Headingly. Again, these are basics which stop fans from becoming disillusioned in rugby league.

Playing wise the reduction to 10 subs is sensible but lets get back to 6. The appearance of lazy and quite frankly over weight players like Neil Baines, Paalesina, Barry Ward etc have reduced playing standards and rendered the honest workers redundant in the game. Too many replacements is a poor attempt to make the game more attractive to the casual viewer by speeding it up, but this is an oxymoron in my opinion. We have lost the different types of player, the natural battles where fitness was so important to an end result and the ball skills that made the game so good in the first place.

Steps have been taken in the right direction with regards to overseas players, but I'd like the residency rule changed to five years and in the case of international rugby, if a player commits to one country then it should be exactly that. No flip flopping or going were the cheap accolades are. Lets stop players treating international rugby like a franchise. I'd also like to see a policy of assistant coaches can only be English and a set ruling put down for appointment of overseas coaches. UEFA (IIRC) insist a head coach should have a certificate, RL should be similarly vigilant with regards to overseas appointments.

Finally, I'd like to see the RFL become more sensible and stop making false promises. The game can grow in its heartlands and we should be proud of that fact. We almost come across as desperate apologists for the likes of the Featherstone's, Batley's and Leigh's who should be welcomed into the RL community, not treated as pariahs because the have ambition. The game needs to start becoming more proud of its heritage and less desperate and 'hard sell' in development areas. Let the game grow naturally and support the grassroots!

If we can get this right, we may have more bargaining power when it comes to SKY negotiations because at the moment, SKY have far too much power for the detriment of the game.

There are so many other things I could mention but lets get the basics right first.

KentishBarry
3rd January 2012, 14:11
I'd begin by endeavoring to restore credibility in how the game is administered. This can be achieved by getting the basics right. Heads should have rolled over the Crusaders episode which was a flagrant example of all that is wrong with the RFL. Once people are held accountable or replaced with people who are competent then things should improve.

The RFL needed the guts to look the play offs in the face and admit they were wrong which the attendances highlight that they were/are. We need to change the play offs to a top 6 format for 14 teams and reward the top team more fairly (stop rewarding mediocrity in the name of false competition and 'intensity'). Getting the league structure right and having a viable play off system is massively important because so much depends on it financially given the international aspect of the game has declined.

There also needs to be a more consistent disciplinary system. At times the sentences and judgements last season were a farce culminating in the Hethringtongate suspension after the Leeds Huddersfield game at Headingly. Again, these are basics which stop fans from becoming disillusioned in rugby league.

Playing wise the reduction to 10 subs is sensible but lets get back to 6. The appearance of lazy and quite frankly over weight players like Neil Baines, Paalesina, Barry Ward etc have reduced playing standards and rendered the honest workers redundant in the game. Too many replacements is a poor attempt to make the game more attractive to the casual viewer by speeding it up, but this is an oxymoron in my opinion. We have lost the different types of player, the natural battles where fitness was so important to an end result and the ball skills that made the game so good in the first place.

Steps have been taken in the right direction with regards to overseas players, but I'd like the residency rule changed to five years and in the case of international rugby, if a player commits to one country then it should be exactly that. No flip flopping or going were the cheap accolades are. Lets stop players treating international rugby like a franchise. I'd also like to see a policy of assistant coaches can only be English and a set ruling put down for appointment of overseas coaches. UEFA (IIRC) insist a head coach should have a certificate, RL should be similarly vigilant with regards to overseas appointments.

Finally, I'd like to see the RFL become more sensible and stop making false promises. The game can grow in its heartlands and we should be proud of that fact. We almost come across as desperate apologists for the likes of the Featherstone's, Batley's and Leigh's who should be welcomed into the RL community, not treated as pariahs because the have ambition. The game needs to start becoming more proud of its heritage and less desperate and 'hard sell' in development areas. Let the game grow naturally and support the grassroots!

If we can get this right, we may have more bargaining power when it comes to SKY negotiations because at the moment, SKY have far too much power for the detriment of the game.

There are so many other things I could mention but lets get the basics right first.

Difficult to argue with most of that Ed!
...But to take your second point (and my question), what would you replace the lost playoff games with?
Also, if we were to dump MW (not sure if you wanted that or not), again, what are those 7 games going to be replaced with?
We are committed to Sky for the time being, who are going to want a fixed number of games to show.

warringtonsaint
3rd January 2012, 14:15
Exiles are already part of the programme.

Yes, they may be - not sure though that a game has yet been scheduled for this year?? - but again to the detriment of the league programme. It would be much better - imho - if it could happen on a blank weekend, not one where we have a full programme of fixtures.

KentishBarry
3rd January 2012, 14:24
Yes, they may be - not sure though that a game has yet been scheduled for this year?? - but again to the detriment of the league programme. It would be much better - imho - if it could happen on a blank weekend, not one where we have a full programme of fixtures.

16th/17th June is free (I think!).
It's one of the complaints I have about the RFL. They tend to be a bit 'last minute' with fixtures like these!
Someone posted earlier on here about the need to publish match dates, particularly internationals, well in advance...and stick to them!

eddiewaringsflatcap
3rd January 2012, 14:40
Difficult to argue with most of that Ed!
...But to take your second point (and my question), what would you replace the lost playoff games with?
Also, if we were to dump MW (not sure if you wanted that or not), again, what are those 7 games going to be replaced with?
We are committed to Sky for the time being, who are going to want a fixed number of games to show.

Put simply I'd do what they do in Australia - have a bye week. Players like Jamie Peacock have cried out that there are too many games. Surely it makes sense for teams to have a bye week. It would be a pioneering move over here and prove how sincere the RFL and SKY are when they have used in the past arguments like 'players welfare' to (IMO falsely) justify the increase in replacements.

My feeling on MW are well known - that it was a bum concept from the start with little raison d etre and has completely lost its way. With the RFL managing it who I wouldnt trust to run a tombola stall then it was always going to fall over.

RedVee Admin
3rd January 2012, 14:53
16th/17th June

Is correct.

KentishBarry
3rd January 2012, 15:42
Put simply I'd do what they do in Australia - have a bye week...

That could work if it was staggered to give Sky something to show each week.
Do you think the clubs would wear it though? Reduced number of games = reduced revenue (unless more fans turned up each week for the remaining games).

geordie_saint
3rd January 2012, 18:32
[QUOTE=eddiewaringsflatcap;397540]Put simply I'd do what they do in Australia - have a bye week. Players like Jamie Peacock have cried out that there are too many games. Surely it makes sense for teams to have a bye week. It would be a pioneering move over here and prove how sincere the RFL and SKY are when they have used in the past arguments like 'players welfare' to (IMO falsely) justify the increase in replacements.
QUOTE]

Sadly in the UK and in Australia, it's the clubs who really own the power in the game. The RFL can't do anything without their consent. Ideally, I agree, play offs should be six teams, but a reduction in games would be fought by the clubs as they'll complain like hell about loss of income etc. I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case with MW as well?

As for your comments about the international scene, I'd agree with that too. However, it is difficult for the RFL to have an impact on that as the RLIF hold the power regarding eligibilty etc and they are incompetent and ruled by the Aussies, who are very insular in their outlook on the entire game. Lions tours down under are a prime example; the Aussies simply don't want them anymore. Next year would have been the perfect time for GB/England tour down under but the Aussies have vetoed it sadly.

Gray77
3rd January 2012, 23:59
Difficult to argue with most of that Ed!
...But to take your second point (and my question), what would you replace the lost playoff games with?
Also, if we were to dump MW (not sure if you wanted that or not), again, what are those 7 games going to be replaced with?
We are committed to Sky for the time being, who are going to want a fixed number of games to show.

Why replace them? The extra play-off games didn't exist 4 years ago and we managed okay. Sky care about ratings and people subscribing to their products. The lack of a few play-off games is not going to hurt their subscription numbers with RL fans in any way. In fact if they have a few less games it means they have less overheads, less travel costs etc. We don't need 'free weekends' either, just a season with a start weekend and a Grand Final weekend with continuous RL in between. If we want to do bye weekends for clubs then stagger them over the season so on some weekends we have 6 games instead of 7 allowing 2 teams a bye weekend at one or two points in the year.

Clubs are not going to be hit in the pocket, they will all still play 13 home games each and if we reduced the play-offs we would end up with a more credible play-off system with bigger play-off crowds which
a, will give the RFL more money as they take the gate receipts,
b, look a hell of a lot better to Sky than the current situation of trying to ignore the fact that the grounds are half-empty, and
c, produce a higher benchmark for teams to aspire to in order to reach the play-offs in the first place, resulting in bigger crowds at the back-end of the year as teams really go for as high a position as they can because under the old system it meant alot more than it does now.

KentishBarry
4th January 2012, 09:04
Why replace them? The extra play-off games didn't exist 4 years ago and we managed okay...

I'm assuming Sky would want a set number of games per season. I also imagine they would want a MW style 'event'.
I actually agree with most of what you say above and I mentioned staggering in my reply to Ed. I haven't done the maths, but I think we could cover the gaps.
The problem we have is pursuading the clubs that, in terms of number of games/revenue, 'less is more'.
We also need to pursuade the fans to turn up to 'more meaningful' playoffs.

Saintokell1974
4th January 2012, 20:30
That could work if it was staggered to give Sky something to show each week.
Do you think the clubs would wear it though? Reduced number of games = reduced revenue (unless more fans turned up each week for the remaining games).

Surely it could actually mean the same/close amount of games if we had as many teams in the elite league as we actually have 1 less currently(think I am correct??) and we could have the odd number also which would work out? As for reducing the play off games- think only sky would be worried, unless they gave the exiles v england games scope over the year to play 3 times (giving chances to various potential england knights>elites players) and making it a series. reducing play offs would also increase potential revenue if marketed correctly and teams may try harder through the season knowing they have to to make these play offs, especially if they may have 'bye' weeks looming which lets other teams leapfrog?

KentishBarry
5th January 2012, 08:55
Surely it could actually mean the same/close amount of games if we had as many teams in the elite league as we actually have 1 less currently(think I am correct??) and we could have the odd number also which would work out? As for reducing the play off games- think only sky would be worried, unless they gave the exiles v england games scope over the year to play 3 times (giving chances to various potential england knights>elites players) and making it a series. reducing play offs would also increase potential revenue if marketed correctly and teams may try harder through the season knowing they have to to make these play offs, especially if they may have 'bye' weeks looming which lets other teams leapfrog?

The number of games 'lost' would depend on the structure of the playoffs.
A simple example (not a suggestion!) would be 3,4,5,and 6 play the first weekend, winners play 1 and 2 second weekend, Grand Final third weekend.
Five games over three weekends. That's four games and one weekend less than we have now.

If we also lost the MW, that's another seven games and a weekend gone.

That's two weekends and eleven televised games to replace, assuming Sky/RFL/Clubs wanted to.

Saintokell1974
5th January 2012, 22:11
[QUOTE=headtackle;397480]Can't argue with what the RFU did. Over Xmas people are crying out to do something and get out and about and a big game, with cheap tickets and giving fans, relatives and visitors a chance to sample Twickenham was bound to succeed. From memory weren't Saracens previously a London club before moving out so probably tapping in to a lot of old fans

Dont think can blame ticket prices for poor attendances at RFL events as plenty of decent advance deals.

Well is the answer to have a christmas/new year 'local derbies' weekend to rival the boxing day friendlies, or even for sky to promote this as a new season build up using the principle of MW/MM so as to cretae interest in the sport/skys viewing subscriptions? Even if used as early friendlies to warm up for a new season these could include Karalius cup/leeds v wakey challenge etc? I know the MM didn't work early season and Manchester may be cold and wet be lots of us attend these friendlies, plus clubs would be showing new/fresh/previously injured and young players??Maybe use these to proceed an exiles game to finish the weekend?

headtackle
6th January 2012, 10:59
Have said before we are daft miss out on Xmas when people are crying out for something to do

Should start the season with the big Boxing Day and New Years derbies - season gets off to a cracking start, big crowds and lots of interest and lets face it the weather and pitches etc are not that much worse than 6 weeks later in Feb

stoneislander
6th January 2012, 11:39
scrap the joke that is millenium madness have a sixteen team league 15 home and 15 away games ,top four play off 1v4 and 2v3 ,winners into grand final.

Gray77
6th January 2012, 14:47
Have said before we are daft miss out on Xmas when people are crying out for something to do

Should start the season with the big Boxing Day and New Years derbies - season gets off to a cracking start, big crowds and lots of interest and lets face it the weather and pitches etc are not that much worse than 6 weeks later in Feb

Spot on, start the season at Christmas with big derby games, full houses watching Saints v Wigan, Leeds v Bradford, Hull v Hull KR, Cas v Wakefield, Wire v Widnes etc, etc, then Round 2 over the New Year with Saints v Widnes, Wigan v Wire, Leeds v Hull, Hull KR v Bradford etc, etc. It would mean all the clubs get their 2 traditional home Bank Holiday games every season, with one at Xmas or New Year and one on Good Friday or Easter Monday.

If we start the season 5 or 6 weeks early it means we get to finish 5 or 6 weeks early, we can have the Challenge Cup Final in June or July when we can showcase it unopposed by other major sports, and we could have the play-offs in August and the GF in early September, when the weather is at its best and the pitches are at their best. It's a bit stupid that we promote ourselves as a Summer Sport then have the showpiece game of the year at the Grand Final in October in a quagmire under the pouring rain.

26 games, 13 at home and 13 away, go back to top 5 or 6 play-offs that really reward the top 2 and encourage teams to finish as high as they can. Do all that and I'd be a happy man. But it never will so I'll be on here every week moaning about it all!

KentishBarry
6th January 2012, 15:02
I guess there's nothing to stop Sky broadcasting a day (or weekend) of derbies if they kicked off at different times, so it could replace the MW 'event'.

I think the summer rugby thing was originally used to bring us and the Aussie's season together for that expanded WCC idea thing. It probably doesn't matter now, so no reason why we couldn't start in Boxing Day...
...If Sky wanted it!

Gray77
6th January 2012, 22:32
I guess there's nothing to stop Sky broadcasting a day (or weekend) of derbies if they kicked off at different times, so it could replace the MW 'event'.

I think the summer rugby thing was originally used to bring us and the Aussie's season together for that expanded WCC idea thing. It probably doesn't matter now, so no reason why we couldn't start in Boxing Day...
...If Sky wanted it!

Sky wouldn't care when we start or end the season, as long as we were playing games in late May, June, July and early August which is when Rugby League is important for them when there is no football on. We keep people subscribed to the sports package in between the football seasons and get good ratings for them on Friday and Saturday nights which is what they want. If the 300,000 or so people who watch the bigger RL games on Sky keep their sports package during the football off-season then Sky are happy. Anything else is just the RFL pandering to them and giving them a bigger stake in the game than they need or probably desire.

Saintokell1974
9th January 2012, 19:35
Spot on, start the season at Christmas with big derby games, full houses watching Saints v Wigan, Leeds v Bradford, Hull v Hull KR, Cas v Wakefield, Wire v Widnes etc, etc, then Round 2 over the New Year with Saints v Widnes, Wigan v Wire, Leeds v Hull, Hull KR v Bradford etc, etc. It would mean all the clubs get their 2 traditional home Bank Holiday games every season, with one at Xmas or New Year and one on Good Friday or Easter Monday.

If we start the season 5 or 6 weeks early it means we get to finish 5 or 6 weeks early, we can have the Challenge Cup Final in June or July when we can showcase it unopposed by other major sports, and we could have the play-offs in August and the GF in early September, when the weather is at its best and the pitches are at their best. It's a bit stupid that we promote ourselves as a Summer Sport then have the showpiece game of the year at the Grand Final in October in a quagmire under the pouring rain.

26 games, 13 at home and 13 away, go back to top 5 or 6 play-offs that really reward the top 2 and encourage teams to finish as high as they can. Do all that and I'd be a happy man. But it never will so I'll be on here every week moaning about it all!

Bear in mind we play CCF in LONDON during the capitals busiest period when the rest of the world are watching every other athletics sport- demeaning our main cup outside the league- may sound great to Sky, but wondered if they have ever thought of the bigger picture? More people seeing the CCF and regular rounds make more people ask- 'where can I see this wonderful game?'

Gray77
9th January 2012, 20:25
Bear in mind we play CCF in LONDON during the capitals busiest period when the rest of the world are watching every other athletics sport- demeaning our main cup outside the league- may sound great to Sky, but wondered if they have ever thought of the bigger picture? More people seeing the CCF and regular rounds make more people ask- 'where can I see this wonderful game?'

Spot on. The Cup Final used to be the nearest thing we had to a 'national event' where non fans would watch the game and be introduced to the sport off the back of it. Aussie players came over here dreaming of playing in a Cup Final and even now I talk to people down here who know who Eddie Waring was just through watching Cup games on the BBC. It is something we needed to protect, something we needed to promote and be proud of. The RFL have damaged it by having it too late into the season, and Sky have needlessly damaged it simply because they didn't have the rights to it and so decided to ignore it or compare unfavourably with the weekly rounds (what a joke!). But it can still be brought back to it's rightful place if we brought it forward in the season and made it special whilst not letting it interfere with the play-off run-in.

robert80
12th December 2023, 16:42
At 10 quid to get in the had it priced correctly, the game was poor and goes to show it's not about the sport itself and more about the event

Indeed. This event has taken place fairly regularly over the years and always a good crowd. Of course it is a massive catchment area and Twickenham is a pull. Event is the key word. If you go to a international RU at Twickenham you can recognize many attending are casual once or twice a year fans and there for the occasion.

Div
12th December 2023, 21:06
Indeed. This event has taken place fairly regularly over the years and always a good crowd. Of course it is a massive catchment area and Twickenham is a pull. Event is the key word. If you go to a international RU at Twickenham you can recognize many attending are casual once or twice a year fans and there for the occasion.

Jesus how did you manage to pull this thread up from over a decade ago?!
Funnily enough nothing changes eh?