I have the “luck” to be in the UK at the moment, and for the past two nights, have had the misfortune to watch the two semi-finals of the Soccer European Champions League.
I say misfortune as both games were completely uninspiring, had very little spark, and for the casual spectator, offered very little by way of a viewing spectacle.
However, for the past two nights, the pubs in the area that I am staying in have been packed to the rafters with people gathering to watch the games.
After the 2007 RWC there was a great deal of warranted criticism of our great game of rugby that it was dull and boring to watch.
Now that same argument could be stated in spades for most soccer games, yet they still gather great passion and interest. Why is that the case?
Before I flew over here, I watched a number of HC, GP and Magners games on Foxtel and was pleasantly surprised at the passion, commitment, speed and skills levels displayed in those games, even – dare i say it – compared to most Super 14 games.
What intrigues me is how these games can’t garner the same level of support as a couple of dodgy European soccer games.
If I now hear one more Pom complain the rugby is boring, non-expansive and dominated by forwards sticking the ball up their jersey, I think I have a couple of suitable responses.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Football articles
- Phoenix need more than flash in the pan crowds (133)
- ‘New football’ fans may help save the game in Australia (124)
- Does Tasmania have a case for A-League inclusion? (119)
- What happened in Port Said was not a football riot (118)
- Magilton struggling to make a mark (68)
- Socceroos screwed over by FIFA, again (41)
- Gulf influence cripples the FFA again (40)
- Melbourne derby reveals tale of two journeys
- Midweek regional matches not hitting the mark
- O’ so close for John: How JON almost landed the biggest job in sport (13)
- Capello ‘walks’ from England’s top job (13)
- Fabio Capello quits as England manager after Terry fallout (4)
- Kewell confident Victory can make charge
- FIFA decision a blow to Olyroos
- Melbourne derby reveals tale of two journeys (0)
- O’ so close for John: How JON almost landed the biggest job in sport (13)
- Capello ‘walks’ from England’s top job (13)
- Why Manchester United are never really beaten (13)
- Die Lowen a chance for a Bundesliga rise? (2)
- Hey, Victory! Give them kids a go (9)
- The problem with Melbourne Victory’s ‘hole’ season (25)
- Explore:
bob said | April 25th 2008 @ 9:36am | Report comment
“If I now hear one more Pom complain the rugby is boring, non-expansive and dominated by forwards sticking the ball up their jersey,”
You wont hear many poms saying that… we love forward play. We also thought the RWC was heart stoppingly exciting… and the soccer fanaticism is due to tribalism, just as the HK, premiership and 6 nations is in rugby…
I hope you enjoy your stay in England, and realise that travel and experience other cultures is indeed lucky, without the need for inverted comma’s.
Dave said | April 25th 2008 @ 9:40am | Report comment
Pity you couldn’t have been there for the Liverpool-Arsenal Qtr final at Anfield or Roma – Man Utd Qtr final or Man U- Arsenal league game or Liverpool – Havant & Waterlooville cup game or Barnsley – Chelsea cup game or Aston Villa – Birmingham derby or Tottenham – Chelsea league game or Portsmouth – Reading league game or Tottenham – Aston Villa league game or… need l go on?? Yes there are crap football games, unfortunately tends to be more so with the greater significance of the match. You are also right about the Rugby WC lots of crap, boring games with a few very good games (non Rugby person having an occassional glance) So whats the point? The English are football mad and that’s their poison…good luck to them as they have the best league in the world.
“Dodgy European games” can be the biggest spectacles in sport. When they are good there are no peers… but you are correct, although a little obvious, to state there are crap games also. Part of the trials and tribulations of being a fan are putting up with the bad which makes the good even more enjoyable. However to get fully emersed into the atmosphere it helps to have an emotional attachment.
Junior said | April 25th 2008 @ 8:34pm | Report comment
The difference is that SOME football matches can SOMETIMES appear uneventful to the uninitiated whereas MOST rugby games are excruciatingly mediocre MOST of the time. I mean seriously, watching two games of football in the UK because you happen to be there is hardly a statistically significant sample. Yes raw numbers are not always indicative of superiority (case in point – Mariah Carey album sales), but when there is an absolute chasm in global interest or viewership between the two sports, surely that is telling you something.
True Tah said | April 28th 2008 @ 10:18pm | Report comment
Martyn,
the 2007 World Cup did end on a dull note, but there were some great games too (Wales v Fiji, South Africa v Tonga).
Soccer is probably going to be number one in the UK in the forseeable future, but I have travelled there several times over the past few years, and interest in rugby has increased dramatically (the reverse it would seem with Australian rugby!!).
Soccer is a tribal thing in the UK, and the English are a bit more obsessed with it than most other countries – doesn’t help their national team though.
Midfielder said | April 28th 2008 @ 11:22pm | Report comment
Martyn Riddle & True Tah
Beauty as they say is in the eye of the beholder ……….. to compare the best car race would bore me to tears.
Comparing good games in RWC to football ———- streches things a tad……………. especially if you want rugby to win, in the first place, I normally ignore these articles , but get real be glad you are in England and come home happier for the experience..
All I can say is you may be write about the EPL ————— but predictions are that in the next round of TV contracts it will be pai over one billion pounds for the international rights have a look at these indian site. Mate get over it
———————–http://goal.com/en/Articolo.aspx?ContenutoId=649885
———————-http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070201/asp/opinion/story_7331845.asp
———————-http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/HF13Df04.html
————————http://asia.news.yahoo.com/060601/5/sports211211.html
Plus there was a link added about three weeks ago about Man U V Arsnel and the world wide audience was over one billion. From the telegraph if orginal poster can find it add to the post.
Ian Noble said | April 29th 2008 @ 3:09am | Report comment
Martyn
Rugby in England will never compete with football in terms of numbers, but there is no doubt that in recent years interest in rugby has grown at rate which five years ago could not have been foreseen. It has found a level which is reinforced by the emergence of new exciting talent, some of whom have switched from football academies to embrace rugby, Cipriani, Care, Sackey, Strettle are prime examples.
In addition,there has been the call from some football managers that football should follow the example of rugby in respecting the referree and officials. Rugby has taken the moral high ground, which football is unable to compete with.
I presume you are in London, but you will find there are rugby pubs where rugby games on Sky are packed out. In the meantime have a great time and if you have time watch a GP game in the flesh, much better than watching on the box.
Spiro Zavos said | April 29th 2008 @ 9:42am | Report comment
In the 1890s and 1900s rugby was far more popular in Britain than football. The 1905 All Blacks, for instance, played England at White City and drew a crowd of 50,000. This was much bigger than com parable football crowds. As a sideliner, haters of SH rugby like Stephen Jones and his ilk should remember that it was the SH touring teams, the All Blacks in 1905, the Springboks in 1906 and the Wallabies in 1908 who ensured that rugby was going to be a mainstream game in the UK and not go the way of royal tennis and the other arcane Public School games.
Rugby lost its popularity dominance in the UK when the RFU (the English rugby union) administrators provoked the split with the the very strong Yorkshire and Lancashire unions in 1895 over the payment of wages for injured players (mainly miners) thereby hastening the creation of rugby league: over a refusal to change the arcane laws of the game to allow a passing/handling game rather than a hacking/kicking game (the chairman of the RFU, for instance, was against tries being awarded more points than drop goals on the grounds that teams shouldn’t be rewarded for having fast players): and the RFU’s refusal to allow club and regional competitions along the lines practised in South Africa, Australia and NZ.
At the time the RFU resolutely turned its back on competitions, professionalism and simpler, more effective laws, football introduced the FA Cup tournament and its now famous club premiership.
It’s said that if we don’t learn from the mistakes of the past, we will repeat them. The RFU has finally accepted club and regional competitions and professionalism, albeit about 100 years after it should have done so. But it is still in the 1890s when it comes to making the rugby laws easier to play in an expansive, skilful manner and to understand.
This brings us to the opposition to the ELVs. History tells us that when the RFU is adamantly opposed to a change/reform in the laws, it is invariably wrong. I cannot think of any improvement in the history of the laws or administration of rugby that the RFU has promoted. It has opposed everything from law reform, to competitions, to the Rugby World Cup etc etc before finally, reluctantly adopting the reforms.
If it weren’t for the SH interventions since the 1880s rugby in England would be a minor sport and not the flourishing sport it is now. The SH-haters should remember this from time to time.
AL said | April 29th 2008 @ 10:23am | Report comment
Martyn Riddle,
The two matches you watched were both quite poor. Manchester United decided for the first time all season to play defensive, and anyone who follows football knew Chelsea vs Liverpool was going to be a scrappy, bland match. The problem is, at the top echelon of European matches, victory is more important then style. In 10 years time, most people will remember who won the 2008 Champions League, but few will remember details apart from the goals and if there is a major incident (injury, red card etc). Watch some EPL matches while you’re in England, they may give you a better indication of how good the game can be.
Dave said | April 29th 2008 @ 5:42pm | Report comment
Spiro
“In the 1890s and 1900s rugby was far more popular in Britain than football”.
Not to my thinking. FA Cup Final 1901 Attendance 110,820, 1905 FAC ATT 101,107. etc
Football league games were drawing crowds of 40-60,000 at times. Chelsea vs ManU 1906 Att 60,000 etc The Football league had 1st and 2nd Division with full professionals!! How did you come up with the above statement? What were the crowds at Rugby matches in their league competition?? Rugby don’t get anywhere near those crowds now, 100 years later. Rugby was never more popular than football when taken as a national perspective. There may have been some individual towns that preferred Rugby.
Spiro Zavos said | April 29th 2008 @ 5:56pm | Report comment
Dave, you are right. I got my decades mixed up. Before the FA was established and the football club premiership and before the 1895 split that saw the creation of rugby league with the Northern League, in other words in the 1880s – so sports historians suggest – rugby was the popular football code in the UK. Once the national club competitions and the FA Cup started football swept rugby away as the popular sport.
My point was not about football, it was about how the stupidity of the RFU allowed rugby to become an elitist sport in England rather than a popular sport, because they wanted to keep the game in the hands of the Public School ‘old farts’. Nothing very much has changed, I fear.