• Super Rugby
• Fixtures
• Wallabies
• Rugby Championship
• International
• Wallabies v All Blacks
• Rugby RSS

The Crowd Says (91) | Page 1 of Comments

• Ian Noble said | December 17th 2008 @ 3:43am | Report comment

  Westy

  You probably don’t appreciate that League is played in the summer months with no direct competition, whereas union is played in the winter in direct competition with football and the other winter team games. League purposely moved to the summer so that it could attract more followers because of the lack of competition. I am not convinced it has been a great success, although I do go to watch Quins RL. Has it swung more rugby union followers to League? Judging from the gates I doubt it.

  And perhaps you can forgive me but my posting in reply to your posting on another blog is relevant .

  “There is no doubt that the GP clubs are looking very carefully at their finances in these difficult times. Unlike the French clubs there is a salary cap in place, currently £4 per annum. There is a view that this should be reviewed downwards as the majority of the cost base as with any professional club whether football etc is salaries for players. Clubs should live within their means and for clubs such as Wasps and Bath, this causes immediate problems as the grounds they use are too small for purpose. Wasps with their following are not generating enough income through the turnstiles and Bath who have the funds to expand at the Rec are constrained by planning controls and either they also have to move or hope that current negotiations with the powers that be will allow expansion at their iconic ground in the centre of Bath. There is no doubt with a bigger ground both clubs would generate more revenue.

  It is well documented that Bristol currently bottom of the GP and Newcastle 2nd bottom are suffering from falling gates and are struggling financially; probably more of reflection of their on field performances as the grounds they use will take bigger gates. This has opened the door for some of the stronger GP clubs to suggest that the GP should be reduced from 12 to 10 and there should no relegation for the remaining clubs in the GP. This is an old argument as Leicester, Gloucester, Northampton and others have long been in favour of a no relegation route and by no coincidence they happen to be amongst the clubs with the biggest regular gates of between 13/17,000 per home game.

  My club Quins is averaging gates in the region of 12,000 at the Stoop and have arranged the big game at Twickenham v Leicester on 27th December where they are hoping for a gate of 50,000, currently they have passed the 40,000 mark; an interesting direct comparison with Quins RL who struggle to get gates in excess of 3000 per home game. By the way I have no beef with League as I go to watch Quins RL during the summer months.”

  “The popularity of union in England is growing as illustrated by the request of Argentina to play one of next years tests in England as it will generate more revenue. From press reports the game will not be played at Twickenham but will probably be at Old Trafford for two reasons it will take an important test to the Lancashire/Yorkshire heartlands where alot of union is played and followed, and will attract a crowd which could fill the 76000 capacity.

  By the way I enjoy Steffy’s selective comments as they are so obviously biased towards a League stand point. Whilst union may have it’s current problems, League will not immune and whether Celtic Crusaders currently producing gates of 1500 will survive in the Super League is debateable with pressure from clubs such as Widnes and Leigh who missed out and enjoy bigger gates. I have just remembered that the new Sky/Setanta agreement for the GP which will run for three years will generate an income of £54M for the clubs. The number of games to be shown has doubled and perhaps is indicative of the awareness of the TV box office appeal for union in England. particularly bearing in mind it is played during winter in direct competition with football, whereas League has a free run being played in the summer.

  No professional sport will be immune from the current financial travails and the professional union game will have to adjust to the current circumstances, sponsors will disappear, gates may reduce but if marketing is slicker and the product is attractive then the GP and the new Championship will survive and be stronger. It doesn’t have to compete with League as the product is improving and the greater number of English qualified players coming through the academy route coupled with a better selection of overseas players will increase the level of interest.”

  Reply

• True Tah said | December 17th 2008 @ 7:22am | Report comment

  Westy

  I thought Leeds got relegated back to the 2nd divsion competition at the end of the 2007-08 season?

  I think Ian’s point is valid, that rugby for the duration of its competition pretty much lives in the shadow of the giant that is the English Premier League, and its slightly smaller brother, the Coca-Cola Championship (having said that, a lot of other futbol comps, including the A-League are in the shadow of the EPL). Having said that, from my experiences in England (which may be outdated), there does not seem cross-over between RL and futbol fans (i.e. a Wigan RL supporter does not generally support Wigan Athletic and vice versa) like there is in Australia.

  As for the GP averaging just under 11,000, it was not so long ago that the average for many clubs would have been about 5,000. Bath seem to sell out the Rec on a regular basis, and could well do with a bigger stadium.

  Reply

• MarkH said | December 17th 2008 @ 7:43am | Report comment

  Westy, Ian right. Having spent a fair bit of time in the UK over the years. It dosnt matter what Rugby people are going to or from, its Money that is the deciding factor. Because Union has far greater pull across into Europe, League does miss the boat. I recon if the media has bias, then you should be writing about the fact that the FA is promoted well above anything else.

  I do suspect in the next few months, payments to players, in soccer, regardless of ability is going to dry up. These massive football clubs will not be able to pay the money players are currently on. Liverpool / Manchester and co. People cant afford prices range from $ 110 to $220 depending on who you see.

  So the money lost in Union / League will mean nothing in comparison to Soccer. The figures that come out will be astounding. Man United makes around 1 Bn a year on supporters gear alone. I cant see that sustaining let alone the rest of the payments.

  Reply

• sheek said | December 17th 2008 @ 8:24am | Report comment

  True Tah,

  I believe Westy was talking about Leeds Rhinos (RL), not Leeds Tykes (RU) who I believe had a name change to Carnegie. Perhaps Westy/Ian can confirm.

  Great post by Westy & great reply by Ian.

  BTW Westy, the greatest myth of the “English rugby media class biased & bluntly purveyors of falsehoods”, is William Webb Ellis. Everyone, even the French, have been suckered into this myth.

  The final insult being it is the name inscribed on the Rugby World Cup.

  Reply
• 

  pothale said | December 17th 2008 @ 8:36am | Report comment

  Ok I’ll nibble on that one. What name should be on it, Sheek?

  Reply

• Matt said | December 17th 2008 @ 9:03am | Report comment

  The thing with NH club rugby (and soccer) is that losses are simply written off by the private owners, similar to the Rabitohs and Russell Crowe. It is unlike NZ or Australian rugby where the union foots the whole bill.

  So teams like Bath and Wasps might be making annual losses, but those losses do not affect the club, only the private underwriters. Even sides like Worcester, who have everything in place now (except results) to become a European powerhouse, have been losing hundreds of thousands a year. But that is the way the sport works there. It is just the same in France too, except the lack of a salary cap means they can afford one-off ridiculously high contracts for star players.

  The big issue with their systems are not clubs that lose money but when the private owners of the clubs lose money on the side, like the EPL culb owner who had most of his money locked up in Icelandic banking and who lost the lot. He therefore cannot hope to continue to fund his club, so they will need to find someone elses money. The same goes for the rugby clubs.

  But the truth still remains that the Super League operates in a time of the year which is free from direct competition. If the shoe was on the other foot and Union was now a summer sport and league competed with Soccer then I wouldn’t imagine risks being taken with the Celtic Crusaders. They are a team based in a region that was shunned by the WRU because it wasn’t commercially viable, with gates barely over 1000 most weeks. Yet they have been given a ESL license?

  Even St Helens, the most succesful RL team of the old Super League era were losing over 250k pounds during their all conquering 2006 season. So if a succesful club with sizeable gates is still losing that kind of money then imagine how they must struggle in an unsucessful season? Yet private money keeps them afloat.

  Both rugby codes are clearly doing ok, even in tough times. But there still remains more money in Union than League. Besides getting slightly higher gates and more sponsorship money, Premier Rugby has also just had a 45 percent increase in it’s TV deal. The 12 team Guinness Premiership will now earn 54million over 3 years. Compared to the deal cut by the RFL back before the economic meltdown of 50million over 3 years, but for 14 (2 extra) teams. It will be interesting to see how the ESL fairs in 2009 once the financial crisis starts to kick in to their comp.

  Of course the Super League teams will add finance from the Challange Cup to the above total, as well as the fact that Sky will be showing National League games too. But then Union clubs have the EDF Cup and the Heineken Cup too. As well as the proposed 14 team professional championship.

  So both codes are making money at a club level, but Union continues to haul in millions a year from the National team, which goes into youth funding and growing the game. This investement into growing amateur side of the game is then coupled with the fact that the GP salary cap is 4million pounds, compared to just 1.9million in Super League. So there is twice as much money being paid to the players in Union, yet both codes seem to be struggling financially? Does that mean Union clubs are pulling in twice the income to cover the costs?

  Reply

• Matt said | December 17th 2008 @ 9:08am | Report comment

  Sorry, GP salary cap is 4.2M, compared to 1.9M in the ESL

  Reply

• sheek said | December 17th 2008 @ 9:19am | Report comment

  Pothale,

  I haven’t given much thought to an alternate name for the RWC, other than it’s not necessary for there to be a person’s name on it.

  The FIFA world cup, replaced the Jules Rimet trophy, which Brazil kept after winning it 3 times (which apparently was the deal). That trophy since went missing.

  So, just calling it the RWC, or perhaps IRB world cup, is fine by me.

  Reply

• El Capitan said | December 17th 2008 @ 9:38am | Report comment

  Matt,

  Can’t say that the English Rugby National team has been dealt well with growing the gaem after the last test series?

  Reply
• 

  pothale said | December 17th 2008 @ 9:53am | Report comment

  Sheek – that wasn’t what I was really asking and you know it.

  You said that Webb Ellis was a myth, and that the name shouldn’t be on the cup.

  What’s the pernicious myth that everyone seemingly has been suckered into? Did Webb ellis not exist? Was he really a girl? He didn’t really invent the game of rugby? He didn’t attend Rugby School at all, in fact he went to nearby Barby National School. However, Playing a game of Barby didn’t have quite the same ring to it, and could have cast aspersions on the gender inclinations of thousands of young men in the area over the following decades. Mind you, it could have got the women’s game off to a much earlier start – I’m just off to play Barby, Mum. Ok dear.

  Reply