Hattons Solicitors Banner
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 197

Thread: Relegation

  1. #101
    In The South Stand Tez the Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    3,296
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Hard to compare for me because it’s a totally different game now to what it was 15 years ago. It’s literally a different sport in some ways. I’ve been playing Union for the last couple of years and that’s even more structured but I’ve kinda played through the era’s we’re talking about and to be fair it amazes me how structured the game is now. The majority of sets are pre-planned, SL teams will have a book full of set plays and players are restricted to certain parts of the field. Players are a lot more restricted these days and I think that’s one reason why the quality isn’t what it was. Dux mentions a brilliant player there in Jason Smith, I really enjoyed watching him play but he would never have been able to play like he did back then in today’s game. He could cut three players out with a pass in his sleep, if he was playing today he’d have to organise a set up play to get the ball into that space.

    Teams like Hull KR and Huddersfield or teams towards the bottom of the league basically play as 17 robots. I think the good teams are the ones with players who are able to recognise when something is on outside of the structure and can turn that chance into a try.
    Steve Prescott MBE (1973-2013)
    V

  2. #102
    In The South Stand Ralph Fridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Around
    Posts
    3,004
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tez the Saint View Post
    Hard to compare for me because it’s a totally different game now to what it was 15 years ago. It’s literally a different sport in some ways. I’ve been playing Union for the last couple of years and that’s even more structured but I’ve kinda played through the era’s we’re talking about and to be fair it amazes me how structured the game is now. The majority of sets are pre-planned, SL teams will have a book full of set plays and players are restricted to certain parts of the field. Players are a lot more restricted these days and I think that’s one reason why the quality isn’t what it was. Dux mentions a brilliant player there in Jason Smith, I really enjoyed watching him play but he would never have been able to play like he did back then in today’s game. He could cut three players out with a pass in his sleep, if he was playing today he’d have to organise a set up play to get the ball into that space.

    Teams like Hull KR and Huddersfield or teams towards the bottom of the league basically play as 17 robots. I think the good teams are the ones with players who are able to recognise when something is on outside of the structure and can turn that chance into a try.
    Pretty much this.

    Also, knockout games in the cup & league are refereed differently. Much, much more is let go at the ruck, slowing it down
    Dave Woods: the guy who makes Eddie Hemmings look like a decent commentator

  3. #103
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph Fridge View Post
    I'm not that disrespectful. At least I can spell Lomax's name correctly
    You called the standard rubbish, what part of that does not disrespect the players?

    You said you will walk away from this rubbish if they don't drop the GF and move the CC to September, that will not happen next year so are you going to stand by your claim and walk away? Yes or No

  4. #104
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tez the Saint View Post
    Hard to compare for me because it’s a totally different game now to what it was 15 years ago. It’s literally a different sport in some ways. I’ve been playing Union for the last couple of years and that’s even more structured but I’ve kinda played through the era’s we’re talking about and to be fair it amazes me how structured the game is now. The majority of sets are pre-planned, SL teams will have a book full of set plays and players are restricted to certain parts of the field. Players are a lot more restricted these days and I think that’s one reason why the quality isn’t what it was. Dux mentions a brilliant player there in Jason Smith, I really enjoyed watching him play but he would never have been able to play like he did back then in today’s game. He could cut three players out with a pass in his sleep, if he was playing today he’d have to organise a set up play to get the ball into that space.

    Teams like Hull KR and Huddersfield or teams towards the bottom of the league basically play as 17 robots. I think the good teams are the ones with players who are able to recognise when something is on outside of the structure and can turn that chance into a try.
    True, they all play pre planned sets, it has come in over a number of years. Players have specific roles, the team need to get to a certain position on the pitch by a certain tackle. For me this isn't worse just different, I do believe people forget how poor some matches were 15 years ago, how people complained about players and refs just the same back then, as time moves on the same complaints remain
    People said 15 years ago that the game was different 15 years before that and so on, it's just natural evolution.

    There's been many fans saying they are never coming back but they do, it's just scaremongering bringing everyone else down with them, many people have said RL is finished since we started over 100 years ago but we are still here

    I would urge everyone to listen to the full eighty from last week, so insightful and positive

    I love listening and talking to players and x players, it so refreshing to talk about rugby and not have to listen to negative people saying players are rubbish, refs are rubbish, rfl is rubbish etc.

  5. #105
    In The West Stand Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    5,922
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    And please don't call me out for being all "hot air." I don't really like my credibility brought into question. You'll find more agree with me than agree with you on this. Because people agree with you or not does not make your view right, lots of people can be wrong, facts are what proves right from wrong not a vote. If you need posters to validate your opinion maybe your not as co ride t as you wish to appear

    Why is it that you always post as though your opinion is fact?

  6. #106
    Learning All The Songs Angry Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    1,192
    Rep Power
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Upside View Post
    You called the standard rubbish, what part of that does not disrespect the players?

    You said you will walk away from this rubbish if they don't drop the GF and move the CC to September, that will not happen next year so are you going to stand by your claim and walk away? Yes or No
    What the hell is wrong with you? Give it a rest and put a bloody sock in it you boring holier than thou clown. What's it got to do with you what him or anyone else does? We all get it that you think everything is rosy with RL and every referee holds a special place in your heart. There's a good few on here gone up in my estimation of late but you're certainly not one of them, you're like Norris off Corrie, and probably have the same luck with the birds has he does.

  7. #107
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Belgian Saint View Post
    And please don't call me out for being all "hot air." I don't really like my credibility brought into question. You'll find more agree with me than agree with you on this. Because people agree with you or not does not make your view right, lots of people can be wrong, facts are what proves right from wrong not a vote. If you need posters to validate your opinion maybe your not as co ride t as you wish to appear

    Why is it that you always post as though your opinion is fact?

    Why is it claimed that negative posters on a forum all joining in means their view is fact?

    The response you quote was about Ralph's claim he will stop being a fan unless his changes are implemented, if he leaves the sport and stops attending and posting then I will concede he stated fact

  8. #108
    In The West Stand Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    5,922
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tez the Saint View Post
    Hard to compare for me because it’s a totally different game now to what it was 15 years ago. It’s literally a different sport in some ways. I’ve been playing Union for the last couple of years and that’s even more structured but I’ve kinda played through the era’s we’re talking about and to be fair it amazes me how structured the game is now. The majority of sets are pre-planned, SL teams will have a book full of set plays and players are restricted to certain parts of the field. Players are a lot more restricted these days and I think that’s one reason why the quality isn’t what it was. Dux mentions a brilliant player there in Jason Smith, I really enjoyed watching him play but he would never have been able to play like he did back then in today’s game. He could cut three players out with a pass in his sleep, if he was playing today he’d have to organise a set up play to get the ball into that space.

    Teams like Hull KR and Huddersfield or teams towards the bottom of the league basically play as 17 robots. I think the good teams are the ones with players who are able to recognise when something is on outside of the structure and can turn that chance into a try.
    Your right about it being a totally different sport. When I played I wouldn't have had a clue if they had started talking about numbering off in defence. I was at Moss Ln when Wally Ashcroft introduced our first set plays, we had three of them, all in the forwards. We had the likes of Geoff Pimblett, Derek Noonan and John Horton (England RU) in the backs, and for them everything was off the cuff.

  9. #109
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    598
    Rep Power
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Upside View Post
    Why is it claimed that negative posters on a forum all joining in means their view is fact?

    The response you quote was about Ralph's claim he will stop being a fan unless his changes are implemented, if he leaves the sport and stops attending and posting then I will concede he stated fact
    I really do think it may be time to have a rest now if I were you

  10. #110
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pasty View Post
    I really do think it may be time to have a rest now if I were you
    I was asked a question and I responded

    My point remains

    Your post has contributed nothing

  11. #111
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    598
    Rep Power
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian Saint View Post
    Well said,,,, everyone, right or wrong are entitled to air their views on here
    When a poster continues to make the same point over and over,, so they can have the lady word it gets boring and makes them look a bit silly. Of course everyone has the right to say what they want. I just tried to give a bit of kindly intended advice. Itís fine to ignore it of course. But sometimes Upside doesnít know when to stop. Night night All

  12. #112
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,818
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    I think the debate about standards is an interesting one, although hampered somewhat by an outright refusal to accept that someone else may have a different opinion.

    For what it's worth, I think assessing the standard is very difficult because it can only ever be based on opinion. Firstly it depends on when you are comparing to. As an example, I'll compare now to the early years of Super League.

    In my opinion, the standard at the top of Super League now is not anywhere near the standard of the early years of the competition. It may be based on nostalgia but the leading lights of Super League in the early years, the likes of Harris, Long, Sculthorpe, Farrell etc are a significant step up on their counterparts now (i.e. Williams, Lomax etc). We have not produced a player who is both tough and skilful like Sculthorpe or Farrell since. Our skilful players now still lack the excitement of a player such as Long. When you think of the best Super League players, how many debuted this decade?

    But, what is often forgotten is that when the big teams used to play each other in the early years of Super League, they often led to blowout scores. It would not be uncommon to see Wigan, Bradford, Leeds and St Helens beat each other by 40 points, even in play off series. Now, matches between the top sides are usually a lot closer.

    The standard at the bottom of Super League is better though. That has probably been emphasised by a decline at the top. The days when sides like Huddersfield and Salford would lose by 50 or 60 points every week have been and gone and the league is better for it.

    I recall a time on here, even in the mid-late 00's when most home games were judged by whether we hit the "mandatory 40". There weren't that many games that were a contest. That is not suggestive of a high standard. I do not have the statistics to hand, but I would wager that the average winning margin in a Super League match is closer now than it was.

    But we can't have it both ways. You cannot have a higher standard and a more competitive league. There has to be a trade off. The higher the standard of the better teams, the more likely that the lower teams get left behind.

    You see it in the Premier League now. The likes of Manchester City (and now they look to be joined by Liverpool) are hitting points totals regularly that not too long ago were seen as once in a generation figures. So the standard at the top is higher, but it makes the likelihood of shock results such as City's defeat at Norwich at the weekend all the more uncommon and the rest of the league suffers and stagnates as a result.

    In rugby league, I think the debate about standard is getting confused with style, which is the more prevalent point. The sport used to have a focus on speed and skill. Now, what wins big games is, and I am sorry to use this phrase, "the grind". It's why we haven't won big games recently. We admirably stick to our principles of playing an entertaining style. That leads to more errors and against a side that has a simple plan to kick well, complete every set, not offload and has a low error count as a top priority, you will inevitably given them chances and risk losing.

    Sides like Wigan have perfected that style and it has succeeded. We saw Warrington succeed with it in the cup final too and noticed them trying that style in 2018, but not perfecting it (instead, they were developing it). Conversely, we have not adopted that style, nor did Warrington under Tony Smith, and neither have won the Super League (2014 aside). In terms of executing a gameplan, I would argue the standard is getting higher. But when that gameplan is incredibly basic and sacrifices what I see as the principles of the sport, it makes you wonder is it worth it?

    We could play as Wigan did to gain their success this decade. We tried under KC in fact, but did not have the discipline to execute. But the price Wigan have paid for that success is a 1/3 decline in crowds since 2011. From a business point of view, is the extra prize money worth it compared to the loss of gate receipts and disconnect from your fanbase? There are no easy answers.

    If a side can find a way to consistently succeed with an entertaining style that counters that conservative, wrestle style approach, then we will have a sport-changer. Nobody has managed that yet, maybe we will persist and crack it? I hope so. If we do, then I anticipate that there will be a perception that the standard is increasing.

  13. #113
    In The West Stand Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    5,922
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RV12 View Post
    I think the debate about standards is an interesting one, although hampered somewhat by an outright refusal to accept that someone else may have a different opinion.

    For what it's worth, I think assessing the standard is very difficult because it can only ever be based on opinion. Firstly it depends on when you are comparing to. As an example, I'll compare now to the early years of Super League.

    In my opinion, the standard at the top of Super League now is not anywhere near the standard of the early years of the competition. It may be based on nostalgia but the leading lights of Super League in the early years, the likes of Harris, Long, Sculthorpe, Farrell etc are a significant step up on their counterparts now (i.e. Williams, Lomax etc). We have not produced a player who is both tough and skilful like Sculthorpe or Farrell since. Our skilful players now still lack the excitement of a player such as Long. When you think of the best Super League players, how many debuted this decade?

    But, what is often forgotten is that when the big teams used to play each other in the early years of Super League, they often led to blowout scores. It would not be uncommon to see Wigan, Bradford, Leeds and St Helens beat each other by 40 points, even in play off series. Now, matches between the top sides are usually a lot closer.

    The standard at the bottom of Super League is better though. That has probably been emphasised by a decline at the top. The days when sides like Huddersfield and Salford would lose by 50 or 60 points every week have been and gone and the league is better for it.

    I recall a time on here, even in the mid-late 00's when most home games were judged by whether we hit the "mandatory 40". There weren't that many games that were a contest. That is not suggestive of a high standard. I do not have the statistics to hand, but I would wager that the average winning margin in a Super League match is closer now than it was.

    But we can't have it both ways. You cannot have a higher standard and a more competitive league. There has to be a trade off. The higher the standard of the better teams, the more likely that the lower teams get left behind.

    You see it in the Premier League now. The likes of Manchester City (and now they look to be joined by Liverpool) are hitting points totals regularly that not too long ago were seen as once in a generation figures. So the standard at the top is higher, but it makes the likelihood of shock results such as City's defeat at Norwich at the weekend all the more uncommon and the rest of the league suffers and stagnates as a result.

    In rugby league, I think the debate about standard is getting confused with style, which is the more prevalent point. The sport used to have a focus on speed and skill. Now, what wins big games is, and I am sorry to use this phrase, "the grind". It's why we haven't won big games recently. We admirably stick to our principles of playing an entertaining style. That leads to more errors and against a side that has a simple plan to kick well, complete every set, not offload and has a low error count as a top priority, you will inevitably given them chances and risk losing.

    Sides like Wigan have perfected that style and it has succeeded. We saw Warrington succeed with it in the cup final too and noticed them trying that style in 2018, but not perfecting it (instead, they were developing it). Conversely, we have not adopted that style, nor did Warrington under Tony Smith, and neither have won the Super League (2014 aside). In terms of executing a gameplan, I would argue the standard is getting higher. But when that gameplan is incredibly basic and sacrifices what I see as the principles of the sport, it makes you wonder is it worth it?

    We could play as Wigan did to gain their success this decade. We tried under KC in fact, but did not have the discipline to execute. But the price Wigan have paid for that success is a 1/3 decline in crowds since 2011. From a business point of view, is the extra prize money worth it compared to the loss of gate receipts and disconnect from your fanbase? There are no easy answers.

    If a side can find a way to consistently succeed with an entertaining style that counters that conservative, wrestle style approach, then we will have a sport-changer. Nobody has managed that yet, maybe we will persist and crack it? I hope so. If we do, then I anticipate that there will be a perception that the standard is increasing.
    Mate, I am not arguing with your point of view, but I have played or watched Rugby since well before SL, and we didn't produce many the standard of Scully and Farrell even before SL.

  14. #114
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pasty View Post
    When a poster continues to make the same point over and over,, so they can have the lady word it gets boring and makes them look a bit silly. Of course everyone has the right to say what they want. I just tried to give a bit of kindly intended advice. It’s fine to ignore it of course. But sometimes Upside doesn’t know when to stop. Night night All
    If it was kindly intended advice it would have been a direct message, it was posted on here so everyone could see, so I believe you are being disingenuous with that comment

    You also make a sly comment like "makes them look silly" and then claim it was a kindly word!

    If I am asked a question I have the option to respond, that's a debate, unlike your posts which have contributed nothing with no opinion or thoughtful insight into the subject
    Last edited by Upside; 16th September 2019 at 22:35.

  15. #115
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RV12 View Post
    I think the debate about standards is an interesting one, although hampered somewhat by an outright refusal to accept that someone else may have a different opinion.

    For what it's worth, I think assessing the standard is very difficult because it can only ever be based on opinion. Firstly it depends on when you are comparing to. As an example, I'll compare now to the early years of Super League.

    In my opinion, the standard at the top of Super League now is not anywhere near the standard of the early years of the competition. It may be based on nostalgia but the leading lights of Super League in the early years, the likes of Harris, Long, Sculthorpe, Farrell etc are a significant step up on their counterparts now (i.e. Williams, Lomax etc). We have not produced a player who is both tough and skilful like Sculthorpe or Farrell since. Our skilful players now still lack the excitement of a player such as Long. When you think of the best Super League players, how many debuted this decade?

    But, what is often forgotten is that when the big teams used to play each other in the early years of Super League, they often led to blowout scores. It would not be uncommon to see Wigan, Bradford, Leeds and St Helens beat each other by 40 points, even in play off series. Now, matches between the top sides are usually a lot closer.

    The standard at the bottom of Super League is better though. That has probably been emphasised by a decline at the top. The days when sides like Huddersfield and Salford would lose by 50 or 60 points every week have been and gone and the league is better for it.

    I recall a time on here, even in the mid-late 00's when most home games were judged by whether we hit the "mandatory 40". There weren't that many games that were a contest. That is not suggestive of a high standard. I do not have the statistics to hand, but I would wager that the average winning margin in a Super League match is closer now than it was.

    But we can't have it both ways. You cannot have a higher standard and a more competitive league. There has to be a trade off. The higher the standard of the better teams, the more likely that the lower teams get left behind.

    You see it in the Premier League now. The likes of Manchester City (and now they look to be joined by Liverpool) are hitting points totals regularly that not too long ago were seen as once in a generation figures. So the standard at the top is higher, but it makes the likelihood of shock results such as City's defeat at Norwich at the weekend all the more uncommon and the rest of the league suffers and stagnates as a result.

    In rugby league, I think the debate about standard is getting confused with style, which is the more prevalent point. The sport used to have a focus on speed and skill. Now, what wins big games is, and I am sorry to use this phrase, "the grind". It's why we haven't won big games recently. We admirably stick to our principles of playing an entertaining style. That leads to more errors and against a side that has a simple plan to kick well, complete every set, not offload and has a low error count as a top priority, you will inevitably given them chances and risk losing.

    Sides like Wigan have perfected that style and it has succeeded. We saw Warrington succeed with it in the cup final too and noticed them trying that style in 2018, but not perfecting it (instead, they were developing it). Conversely, we have not adopted that style, nor did Warrington under Tony Smith, and neither have won the Super League (2014 aside). In terms of executing a gameplan, I would argue the standard is getting higher. But when that gameplan is incredibly basic and sacrifices what I see as the principles of the sport, it makes you wonder is it worth it?

    We could play as Wigan did to gain their success this decade. We tried under KC in fact, but did not have the discipline to execute. But the price Wigan have paid for that success is a 1/3 decline in crowds since 2011. From a business point of view, is the extra prize money worth it compared to the loss of gate receipts and disconnect from your fanbase? There are no easy answers.

    If a side can find a way to consistently succeed with an entertaining style that counters that conservative, wrestle style approach, then we will have a sport-changer. Nobody has managed that yet, maybe we will persist and crack it? I hope so. If we do, then I anticipate that there will be a perception that the standard is increasing.
    This is a very good and insightful post. Good point about style and standard being confused, I believe people may have preferred the game 15 years ago but that's different to standard.

    Not sure if your comment about unwilling to accept others have different opinions is aimed at me or not let me be clear. I do accept other people have different opinions, but when they are shared on a forum they are open to be challenged, anyone countering the view is entitled to share their view and reasons.
    Theres a big difference with not agreeing with someone else's view and not accepting they hold a different view

  16. #116
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    598
    Rep Power
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Upside View Post
    If it was kindly intended advice it would have been a direct message, it was posted on here so everyone could see, so I believe you are being disingenuous with that comment

    You also make a sly comment like "makes them look silly" and then claim it was a kindly word!

    If I am asked a question I have the option to respond, that's a debate, unlike your posts which have contributed nothing with no opinion or thoughtful insight into the subject
    Ok. Would you like to have the last word? Go on. You know you want to.....

  17. #117
    Learning All The Songs Angry Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    1,192
    Rep Power
    4

    Default


  18. #118
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pasty View Post
    Ok. Would you like to have the last word? Go on. You know you want to.....
    Oh I see what you did there, again adding nothing to the debate, just trying to be clever and not succeeding

    Do you have any of your own rugby views which you could share with the forum for healthy respectful debate?

  19. #119
    In The South Stand Sean Day's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    I think there were as many average to good players as there are now but there were more star names. The Paul brothers, Vainikolo, Vaikona, Hape, Harris, Fielden, Renouf, Robinson,Offiah, Edwards, Tuigamala, Barrett, Iro, Newlove, Long, Scully, Farrell...probably missed loads but you get my drift. We donít have as many names like that anymore but that could be sorted to a large extent by withdrawing the cap or at least changing it substantially

  20. #120
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sean Day View Post
    I think there were as many average to good players as there are now but there were more star names. The Paul brothers, Vainikolo, Vaikona, Hape, Harris, Fielden, Renouf, Robinson,Offiah, Edwards, Tuigamala, Barrett, Iro, Newlove, Long, Scully, Farrell...probably missed loads but you get my drift. We don’t have as many names like that anymore but that could be sorted to a large extent by withdrawing the cap or at least changing it substantially
    I fully agree that those were great players Sean, there was some great games and as already pointed out the game was different then and many preferred it's style.

    Couple of points

    Early days of full professional, some fringe players were still quite average, defence wasn't as key as now, making easier for flair players to shine and therefore our view of them

    In the 00s many people were saying similar about the 90s, there are no Hanleys, Gregory, Scholfield, Platt etc.

    Players are held in higher regard after they finish playing, many of the players mentioned got stick and were wuestioned st times when playing, in time we forget the bad games and remember the good

    I don't think we will respect the current group until they finish playing, we have some great players, Walmsely, Lomax, Williams, Hastings, Barba, and some more, then we have Burgess, Bateman, Whitehead etc. All of which have played in SL and come through our systems, they have been so successful they have been picked up by the richest league in RL

    When I was growing up in the 70s, 80s the older generation always told me how great the previous players were

    As already pointed out, the sport has changed, players have adapted to the skills required

    I think it's a case of we don't realise what we do have. The under 19s is the strongest I have ever known it, the youth systems outside the heartlands are very strong, Newcastle, London etc. Wigan have just signed a London 17 year old on a five year deal. Many new clubs are growing from grass roots up, shaming some historic clubs with their systems and community engagement.

    The championship attendances are up 30% I read TV audiences are up, player numbers at youth level are high, lots to be happy about

    RL seems to attract doom and gloom, people are so down on the product, so much so they claim to walk away from the sport unless the CC is moved to September and the GF is dropped? We seem to search for the failures, what can we point out is bad? Swinton debacle is a prime example of the negativity of some fans, the hostility and dramatic outbursts can hold a team back and have negative affects on the game as a whole. That's why I challenge such negative views, I don't believe they will lead to any positive change. Getting involved, promoting the sport, coaching, taking new people to games, pointing out these fantastic humans doing miles of running, big collisions and super in the corner try's like Makinson to friends, sharing positive messages on social media, all have a greater affect on change than complaining and threatening to walk away on a forum.

    Swinton is a prime example of careful what you wish for

  21. #121
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    598
    Rep Power
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Upside View Post
    Oh I see what you did there, again adding nothing to the debate, just trying to be clever and not succeeding

    Do you have any of your own rugby views which you could share with the forum for healthy respectful debate?
    Oh I think Iím adding to the debate Upside but not in a way you are comfortable with or even understand!

    There are many possible opinions and many ways to express them. I spent close to 40 years as a psychotherapist so Iím familiar with lots of forms of self expression

    I think in rugby terms standards have fallen systematically over the last 20 years or so. There are probably many reasons for that. One is the ways in which coaches and players express themselves on the training pitch and in matches. Not being beaten has become more important than painting beautiful pictures with Matynesgue style Murphynistic self confidence. You also have your own style of expression on here as well. And so you should

    Holbrook has brought back a desire for self expression which, most of the time, has made us better to watch. Something is still missing in the mindset of some of the players. Not that they donít try or they donít care. I donít believe that.

    The depreciation of standards is something to do with how we have to compete with other sports and other interests, the woeful league structure and desire for muscle ahead of skill, confidence and speed.

    None of this means that I devalue modern players. I couldnít do one tenth of what they do.

    I hope our new coach valued the beauty of the game. If want to tell me my posts are vacuous again. Thatís ok. I donít mind.

  22. #122
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    42
    Posts
    7,155
    Rep Power
    26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian Saint View Post
    Does the Grand Final attract a bigger TV audience than the cc final?
    No, the Challenge Cup Final is watched by about a million more people, and it should be given it's on free TV, but both are lower than they were 6-7 years ago.

    Around 1.3 million watched last years Challenge Cup Final and around 285,000 watched last years Grand Final.

    Last years cumulative audience for the BBC's Challenge Cup games was the lowest on record, at around 4.5 million for the seven ties compared to 7.9 million for nine ties in 2011. I imagine this years Cup Final drew a bigger rating than 2018, but the figures are poor compared to only 6-7 years ago. The date does not help, and it'll be interesting to see if we get a rise in viewers once it has been moved from the August B/H weekend. But, the Final has been on that weekend for quite a while, so the drop in viewers isn't all about the date of course.

    Grand Final viewing figures eb and flow depending on the teams involved, but have sat somewhere between 240-285k for the last 4-5 years. Saints last Grand Final win was the last GF to pull in over 300k in 2014, but figures over 300k used to be the norm before figures dipped around 2012-ish.

  23. #123
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pasty View Post
    Oh I think I’m adding to the debate Upside but not in a way you are comfortable with or even understand!
    Not comfortable with? How do you know what I am comfortable with? You obviously don't, you have a high opinion of yourself if you believe you can tell that. And don't tell me what I understand, again you have no idea and it's an insight into your mentality that you think you do know. Until the comments below you hadn't added to the debate at all, you've added the below I suspect because I called your wasted posts out
    There are many possible opinions and many ways to express them. I spent close to 40 years as a psychotherapist so I’m familiar with lots of forms of self expressiongood, I'm impressed you have had a successful career, but it's no proof that your opinion is more worthy than anyone else's

    I think in rugby terms standards have fallen systematically over the last 20 years or so. There are probably many reasons for that. One is the ways in which coaches and players express themselves on the training pitch and in matches. Not being beaten has become more important than painting beautiful pictures with Matynesgue style Murphynistic self confidence. You also have your own style of expression on here as well. And so you shouldi think your describing the attractiveness of the product as opposed to standards, they are two different things

    Holbrook has brought back a desire for self expression which, most of the time, has made us better to watch. Something is still missing in the mindset of some of the players. Not that they don’t try or they don’t care. I don’t believe that.

    The depreciation of standards is something to do with how we have to compete with other sports and other interests, the woeful league structure a different point and one discussed a lot. It's a structure used in many other sports, not unique to RL. The NRL are doing well with the same play off structure so cannot be used as a sole reason for perceived standards and desire for muscle ahead of skill, confidence and speed. Some props in the 80s and 90s were far more muscle bound, look at Andy Platt, most forwards in successful teams now are more athletic

    None of this means that I devalue modern players. I couldn’t do one tenth of what they do.

    I hope our new coach valued the beauty of the game.and so do I, but accept the game has changed and enjoy and admire the modern approach also If want to tell me my posts are vacuous again. That’s ok. I don’t mindmaybe you do, maybe you don't, it's irrelevant, you, I and any other poster just responds as they see fit, no need to anticipate the next response and tell people what you don't mind .
    I'd rather use multi quote but using a tablet I find bold easier

  24. #124
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    No, the Challenge Cup Final is watched by about a million more people, and it should be given it's on free TV, but both are lower than they were 6-7 years ago.

    Around 1.3 million watched last years Challenge Cup Final and around 285,000 watched last years Grand Final.

    Last years cumulative audience for the BBC's Challenge Cup games was the lowest on record, at around 4.5 million for the seven ties compared to 7.9 million for nine ties in 2011. I imagine this years Cup Final drew a bigger rating than 2018, but the figures are poor compared to only 6-7 years ago. The date does not help, and it'll be interesting to see if we get a rise in viewers once it has been moved from the August B/H weekend. But, the Final has been on that weekend for quite a while, so the drop in viewers isn't all about the date of course.

    Grand Final viewing figures eb and flow depending on the teams involved, but have sat somewhere between 240-285k for the last 4-5 years. Saints last Grand Final win was the last GF to pull in over 300k in 2014, but figures over 300k used to be the norm before figures dipped around 2012-ish.
    Your stats are impressive Gray77

    Just a thought, had league structure etc remained the same, would the figures have dropped or remained or grown?

    I suspect they would have dropped more, I think viewing figures and attendance at matches have been affected by modern trends, more channels, more concerts, X boxes, more social activities to attract people etc.

    20 years ago, pre Internet and availability of multi channels, events and concerts there were less options to spend our social time, IMO

  25. #125
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    The discssuion on standards came from Ralph's post about the structure. When I opposed his suggestions (no GF movve CC to September etc.) he said he would stop being a fan

    So to go back to that original point, will Ralph be a man of his word and stop going to games next year, stop being a fan of the sport if his suggestions are not implemented? He strongly denied it was hot air after all and mostnhere have jumped to his defence, do you all think he meant what he said or will it be retracted?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •